Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Leaf Capture 10.0.4 Update 2 now out  (Read 8659 times)
Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« on: December 19, 2006, 02:37:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Didn't try it yet, but supposedly stability has been improved, amongst other things.


Get it here .
Logged
bcroslin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 324


WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 22, 2006, 10:19:03 AM »
ReplyReply

I downloaded LC v10 v2 and gave it a whirl tethered to my Valeo 22 and had an issue where the software kept dropping communication with the back. I made sure everything was locked down and still had the issue. Fired up LC v8 and was able to shoot without a hitch.

Tried doing a few converisons with the new v10 and had about as much luck as tethering. While adjusting brightness and contrast the preview updates incorrectly. As I tweak the brightness it takes a moment for the preview to catch up. If I then zero out the adjustment the preview does not reflect the change. If I then adjust the brightness the already bright preview then just gets brighter.

IMO LC v10 is a disaster. It is not usable in any way shape or form. The fact that it's coded in Java makes it that much more unusable on a Mac. Leaf shooters in this forum have often complained about v10 and the fact that Leaf continues right down the path with no deviation is very disappointing.

Maybe v10 works great with newer backs but for me v10 is totally unusable.

(btw, I'm using a Mac dp 1.8 G5 w/ 4 gigs of ram - I'd like to hear what others using intel Macs are getting with v10)
Logged

Bob Croslin, Photographer
http://www.bobcroslin.com
LMO
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 37


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2006, 11:10:34 AM »
ReplyReply

The logic in LC10 is far from logical. .. But I am not Spock..  

> If I then zero out the adjustment the preview does not reflect the change. If I then adjust the brightness the already bright preview then just gets brighter.

This is supposedly a "feature". Personally I find it very frustrating. To go from "+0.5" to "+0,2" you have to go "-0.5" "+0,2" if you just set +0.2 you end up with +0.7.. there is no relation between the number on the scale and the actual value.. argh!...

Try shooting BW files. To get the color back you need to go "BW> Color > BW > Color"..

V10 is full of those stupid bugs..

.. just fix it.. Over 2 years since v10 was announced and it is still in beta. whatever Leaf tries to tell us, it is not "release ready".

There are one-man-team shareware converters more mature and stable than Leaf Capture.    

Lasse


Quote
I downloaded LC v10 v2 and gave it a whirl tethered to my Valeo 22 and had an issue where the software kept dropping communication with the back. I made sure everything was locked down and still had the issue. Fired up LC v8 and was able to shoot without a hitch.

Tried doing a few converisons with the new v10 and had about as much luck as tethering. While adjusting brightness and contrast the preview updates incorrectly. As I tweak the brightness it takes a moment for the preview to catch up. If I then zero out the adjustment the preview does not reflect the change. If I then adjust the brightness the already bright preview then just gets brighter.

IMO LC v10 is a disaster. It is not usable in any way shape or form. The fact that it's coded in Java makes it that much more unusable on a Mac. Leaf shooters in this forum have often complained about v10 and the fact that Leaf continues right down the path with no deviation is very disappointing.

Maybe v10 works great with newer backs but for me v10 is totally unusable.

(btw, I'm using a Mac dp 1.8 G5 w/ 4 gigs of ram - I'd like to hear what others using intel Macs are getting with v10)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91939\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Lasse Mørkhagen
http://www.dpf.no

I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be. -Douglas Adams
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2375


« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2006, 11:12:18 AM »
ReplyReply

I use Intel MacBookPro and Beta Test on Windows. On all platforms it is disappointing, cannot say otherwise.

When I really need to get some work done I have to revert to 8.4.4 which I really like since it is fast and stable.

Update 2 is stable on my Mac's but still slow using tethered and even more so when processing several hundreds of files. Cannot say whether it is stable because I am only using it a couple of days. It appears to be more stable than update 1.

When doing a few images I tend to process in LC10 because of the quality, otherwise I shoot in LC8.4.4 and process via the image processor in CS.

I just hope Leaf doesn't discontinue developing LC8, that would be my biggest nightmare. Having to shoot tethered with LC10 especially when doing fashion accessories on a fashion exchange (where people will only let you have the items for several minutes before they have to rush back).
« Last Edit: December 22, 2006, 03:59:34 PM by Dustbak » Logged
bcroslin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 324


WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2006, 12:43:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This is supposedly a "feature". Personally I find it very frustrating. To go from "+0.5" to "+0,2" you have to go "-0.5" "+0,2" if you just set +0.2 you end up with +0.7.. there is no relation between the number on the scale and the actual value.. argh!...
This is the most counter intuitive thing I've ever heard. So it's not a bug but a feature?! Give me a break.

My advice to the coders at Leaf is to throw in the towel with LC v10 and buy up Raw Developer quick before someone else does. The difference in file quality in the new backs is negligible and it's now the software that seperates the men from the boys. As James and others have stated over and over Capture One is a very mature and robust product and a major selling point of buying into the Phase system. Leaf is taking a beating over LC 10. It's time for Leaf to do something, anything, to convince us that software is not going to be the achilles heel of the system in the future.

If it weren't for Adobe stepping up conversion quality of mos files in ACR 3.5 I'd be putting my Valeo on ebay right about now.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2006, 12:44:34 PM by bcroslin » Logged

Bob Croslin, Photographer
http://www.bobcroslin.com
bjornaagedk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2006, 02:20:23 PM »
ReplyReply

I own both phase H20 and Leaf Aptus 75. Actually I sold my P45 and bought the Aptus75 instead. I do not regret that, but I am very happy to have a Phase back in my studio as well. I plan to upgrade the H20 to a P30s or maybe a P45s and continue to have both Leaf and Phase.

Why? The leaf back gives me a perfect quality without lens cast correction problems and without having to "wake up" the back before every shot.  I works "okay" - not perfect - with LC 10.0.4 in situations when I have to make a few product shots. (most of my jobs).

In situations where I have to shoot fifty, maybe even hundreds of images, I choose the Phase back, only because of the super C1-Pro software workflow.

Shooting many images with the Leaf software is a nightmare with switching forth and back various palettes and dropdown / pullup menus. It simply is not logical, stable and fast to use.

So after shooting with the Leaf back in studio for the last six months, I must say that I think my next back will be a Phase back, simply because of the C1 software.

Leaf developers: Please have a close look at the C1 software and COPY it as much as you can, - THIS is the way these things have to work in a professional environment.
Logged
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #6 on: December 23, 2006, 10:43:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Leaf developers: Please have a close look at the C1 software and COPY it as much as you can, - THIS is the way these things have to work in a professional environment.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91969\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Leaf doesn't need me to tell them how to make software.  From what I can tell it seems damn hard, because if you've ever used Nikon Capture or tried to tether with Canon software you realize even companies with huge resources miss the mark sometimes.

IMO Leaf has missed a great opportunity by not expanding the thought of V-8.

V-8 is older software so the interface is not pretty like LC10 or C-1, but the advantage of V-8 is it's modular and requires very little power to run. I've yet to find a powerPC computer that won't run V-8 from 12" G4's to Quad 5's.

C-1 is great software and the best batch processing software period, but it does require a lot of power on set, which means the latest intel powerbooks or desktop boxes, though from what little I have read about Phase v. 4 it will go to a more modular system in the future.

It's obvious that Leaf got a lot of pressure to design a C-1 look alike in LC10 but somwhere something got lost in the translation.  It's not that LC10 does't tether, because it does, but processing functionality is just not possible with a large amount of files.

Which makes me wonder where the manufacturers get their feedback?

It's one thing to go on set for a celebrety shoot where they only shoot 50 frames and process 4 or 5.  In that sceanrio any software, including LC10 works fine.

It's also fine to design wb and input profiles for the photographer that shoots with window light and jacks around with the image in photoshop for 5 hours.

But that's not the intended market for these cameras, the market is for the photographer that shoots thousands of frames and has deadlines, for web galleries, color must be spot on but beautiful, tethering, processing must be stable, input profiles must be moveable just like film and previews must be quick and accurate, so if there is a focus issue, or highlight blowout it's known then.

Early on I started thethering with V-8 and the Aptus for just those reasons.  Even on location, with no power I worked a system that will allow battery power for the day and the difference it makes having a low powered fast tethering software is the difference in getting the shot or not.

Personally, I think Leaf missed a great opportunity not to expand upon the original thought of V-8, but I'm sure marketing got in the way.  V-8 takes more than a 5 word sound bite to explain the real benefits of this type of modular system and me too solutions rarely work.  (See the U.S. auto industry for example).

Still, I hold to my premise that if the manufacturers had to go into a hotel room and produce jpegs from 1000 files an evening, all of these softwares (and hardware) would function much differently.

It seems all the manufactuerers want to send their rep to assist tech on a celeb or an editorial fashion shoot for a few hours, or put their cameras on lookout point to shoot a few mountains or trees, but once again, that is not the intended market for these cameras and backs.

I think if they would sit down with our producer and watch her write out $60,000 in checks before we start working, then watch 11 clients huddled around a monitor asking why are the faces red, or why is the previews rough, they would understand how important useability, speed and stability is to our work.

JR
Logged
mkravit
Guest
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2006, 03:11:16 PM »
ReplyReply

I really feel bad for Leaf....no, I actually don't, but I do feel bad for fellow photographers trying to make a living using Leaf stuff.

Right now, I know of approx 8 people that have returned their backs to Leaf due to defects such as centerlines and color gain issues. In fact, I have been asked by one friend to take a look at his new Aptus 75 tomorrow to confirm his problems before he sends it back on Tuesday for a full refund.

I also can not understand Leaf not getting on LC10 and making it a kick butt program.  Most of the people I know leaving Leaf are now using C1 of Flexcolor. Leaf had an incredible opportunity, the Aptus 22 was amazing, they blew it pure and simple.

I fear that unless Leaf gets LC11 out immedately and fixes all of the Aptus defects they will not be around in 12 months regardless of the Hy6.
Logged
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2006, 09:56:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I really feel bad for Leaf....no, I actually don't, but I do feel bad for fellow photographers trying to make a living using Leaf stuff.

Right now, I know of approx 8 people that have returned their backs to Leaf due to defects such as centerlines and color gain issues. In fact, I have been asked by one friend to take a look at his new Aptus 75 tomorrow to confirm his problems before he sends it back on Tuesday for a full refund.

I also can not understand Leaf not getting on LC10 and making it a kick butt program.  Most of the people I know leaving Leaf are now using C1 of Flexcolor. Leaf had an incredible opportunity, the Aptus 22 was amazing, they blew it pure and simple.

I fear that unless Leaf gets LC11 out immedately and fixes all of the Aptus defects they will not be around in 12 months regardless of the Hy6.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92090\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I don't know about the business part, because I think Aptus sales are pretty good.

If V-8 had a temp tint slider or Lighroom was a bullet, maybe the LC10 problems wouldn't be an issue, or even mentioned, but that's not the case.

The real thing is the Aptus, or at least my A-22 makes a beutiful file.  The buzz kill is it takes more work to get there with it, at least shooting people and skin.

Now in all fairness, the Hasselblad just recently got up to speed and the P25 doesn't produce better skin tones either, but at least those two have stable software suites.

The P-30, well, Phase got that one good right out of the box.

I agree though, Leaf has to get something cooking with sofftware and it's got to come out of the oven fully baked.

JR
Logged
bcroslin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 324


WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 23, 2006, 11:12:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Not sure how many here have downloaded CS3 but I have to say I'm impressed with the new version of Bridge. Adobe has implemented many of the color tweaking tools from Lightroom and Bridge is now stable and fast.

I hate to say it but I feel like I'm wasting my time with LC v10. I'm happy to stick with v8 for tethering and use CS3 for conversions.

When I'm ready to invest in a new MFD back I'll look at my options regarding backs and integrated conversion apps like C1 and go from there.
Logged

Bob Croslin, Photographer
http://www.bobcroslin.com
Terence h
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 105


WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 23, 2006, 11:49:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Didn't try it yet, but supposedly stability has been improved, amongst other things.
Get it here .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91452\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I was really surprised to hear  believe it is coded in Java , what a bad idea, in my virtual reality days
stitching panoramics together all my java tools where the worst, demanding huge resources from the computer.
And i see that 10.0.4 requires at least a G5, why, if ACR , Lightroom and other raw developers require pretty moderate resources.
Why does not Leaf simply dump this software and start from scratch based on products that actually
work.

I will be using ACR, Lightroom and anything else that will do the job.

Anyway just received my Aptus 65 will be testing just as soon as Christmas and New Year are over.

Regards
Terence Hogben
Logged

Terence Hogben. Durban. South Africa. http://www.terencehogben.co.za
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 24, 2006, 04:26:30 AM »
ReplyReply

problem with the use of dng converters as lightroom, acr or raw develloper is that the quality depends on the information which is in the dng files. the leaf mos-to-dng converision is done in a simple way.
especially in the hilights s much more headrom, which could be written in the dng files
or it can be cut, as soon one channel is over 255.
in  the simple way you loose around 1-2 stops possibility to recover hilights.
ofcourse you just see the difference if you compare 1:1 a "good" written dng with a "bad" written dng, but the difference is surprising.
Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
robert zimmerman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 223


« Reply #12 on: December 24, 2006, 04:52:08 AM »
ReplyReply

With the LC10 update 2 the software is at least semi stable and I'm getting pretty decent skin tones, which is really not easy with digital and has been driving me mad in LC8. If LC10 was faster and 100% reliable, it would be a good start. But it isn't there yet.

I actually don't mind the the way LC8 is layed out, it's very simple to use. The most important thing is it's fast and works. What doeasn't work for me is getting skin color and smooooooth subtle tones in LC8. I can't for the life of me figure out why. If anyone knows how to get neutral, creamy smooth skin tones in 8 please let me know!
Logged
yaya
Guest
« Reply #13 on: December 24, 2006, 04:54:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
problem with the use of dng converters as lightroom, acr or raw develloper is that the quality depends on the information which is in the dng files. the leaf mos-to-dng converision is done in a simple way.
especially in the hilights s much more headrom, which could be written in the dng files
or it can be cut, as soon one channel is over 255.
in  the simple way you loose around 1-2 stops possibility to recover hilights.
ofcourse you just see the difference if you compare 1:1 a "good" written dng with a "bad" written dng, but the difference is surprising.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92139\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Rainer,

At the moment, Leaf Mosaic files don't need to be converted to DNG in order for them to go into the above mentioned programs, so if any clipping occurs it is down to the algorithms and settings in these softwares.

Yair
Logged
E_Edwards
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 228


« Reply #14 on: December 24, 2006, 05:16:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I really feel bad for Leaf....no, I actually don't, but I do feel bad for fellow photographers trying to make a living using Leaf stuff.


You have to put things into perspective. I make a living out of two Aptus65 and despite the software issue and (correctible) centrefold issue, I am still quite positive that if I needed to choose a new camera back today, I would probably choose the same Leaf backs.

For still-life, that is, an image ready to view at 100% in Lightroom in about 10 seconds after pressing the shutter, and probably less if I dispensed with the hideous Rollei shutter and used the preshoot facility (or whatever they call it), then processing to render an 80 MB tif in about 7 seconds. That, for still-life is mega quick. The Live Video, bad as it may seem to the uninitiated, is probably the best around too. Also, no-one disputes that Leaf files are excellent. So, on the whole, pretty good.

For uses other than still-life, I'm not an expert, for instance, I don't shoot models every day, and yet, every time I've needed to shoot and ad with models, I've had more than beautiful results with the Canon as I personally find medium format itself is too slow to focus for model shots, too cumbersome. I've seen fashion files from a top guy, (I had to retouch in a detail) shot with P45 and I thought, what's the big deal, I can certainly get better resuls with my Canon. I guess fashion guys need to look good in front of their clients, with their big gear, a Canon 1DS is too commonplace these days and it doesn't impress so much  

There is also the architectural photographers with their wide angles and their problems.

And Leaf have probably not done themselves any favours with the negative posts about the slowness of their programs. Yes, LC8 may do the job, but it doesn't have the funcionality that I need and never will and LC10 seems too bound to slow code as it is.

My personal wish is for Leaf to talk to Adobe and vice-versa and make Lightroom the software to use, both for capture and processing.  There is no doubt that Lightroom is going to become as ubiquitous as Photoshop, and for practical reasons it makes sense to use as few applications as possible to save time in the day-to-day running of our business.

Edward
Logged
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #15 on: December 24, 2006, 06:05:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You have to put things into perspective. .............................................. need to look good in front of their clients, with their big gear, a Canon 1DS is too commonplace these days and it doesn't impress so much  


And Leaf have probably not done themselves any favours with the negative posts about the slowness of their programs. Yes, LC8 may do the job, but it doesn't have the funcionality that I need and never will and LC10 seems too bound to slow code as it is.

My personal wish is for Leaf to talk to Adobe and vice-versa and make Lightroom the software to use, both for capture and processing.  There is no doubt that Lightroom is going to become as ubiquitous as Photoshop, and for practical reasons it makes sense to use as few applications as possible to save time in the day-to-day running of our business.

Edward
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92144\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


You covered a lot of territory but to put things into perspective, if you use a Leaf Valeo, or Aptus and you shoot a volume of images the only stable way to tether is V-8.

LC10 .04 update 2 is better than the 4 previouis versions, but still not there for most of our use.  

In regards to fashion, well that also covers a lot of territory.  A lot of fashion work involves tethering and trying to reliably tether with a 4 pin firewire cable from a 1ds Mark II is maddening.

I've tried every way possible.  When it works it's fine, but you can count on at least 4 disconnects a day and that's in the studio.  Location double that.

Belive it or not, when you have a truck load of equipment and a dozen people in the room few clients notice the camera, especially tethered.  They do notice disconnects or off color.

For some work, especially location the Canons are good but when it comes to cosmetics and hair, detail is important because you need as much clean data as possible to get to the final result.

Also with the Canons for any page size you must crop and the Canon masks help but once again it's just another workaround and a different look as you pull back to make images fit.

Then the lenses.  Other than the longer lenses, Canons  lenses are a mess and the 50 is full of womp.  Maybe the new 50 1.2 will fix that, but as of today most of the Canon lenses are lacking compared to what I currently use.

Yes the Leaf can produce a stunning file, but it takes a lot to get there with skin tones.  The color response is by the numbers, not by the look and click balancing on any grey card can produce some unwelcome redness in faces.

Once again I can and do fix that in PSCS, or Lightroom, but you have to work at it and develope your own presets, something Leaf could do with better input profiles and cleaner WB settings.

As far as lightroom or any third party software being the Leaf solution, that may happen, but not for tethering quickly and not for sending presets back to the camera that are locked in.

Third party software is fine and I use it daily, but Leaf knows as well as anyone on this forum that with Phase you don't have to go that direction.  If you do so it's out of choice not need.

I can process a Leaf file out with no corrections and correct it in photoshop, but that is another big step in the process and another few hours of work when you have hundreds or thousands of files.

The real issue is not just the look of the file, or can a file be corrected, it's how fast you can get there and more importatnly how reliably.

I want Leaf to succeed because it gives us all more options, even the people that don't use Leaf, though IMO Leaf must come up with their own software solution.  Waiting for Adobe or Apple to have the answer might be a year and probably never give the full functionality of a dedicated software like C-1 offers with the Phase.

JR
Logged
bcroslin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 324


WWW
« Reply #16 on: December 27, 2006, 08:38:11 PM »
ReplyReply

After giving up on LC 10 I thought no one likes a quitter so I did some research and posted a question to another forum hoping to get some answers on apps written in java. There's a few simple tweaks that can be made to the java engine in OS X that I believe produced snappier results from the UI of LC 10.

First, go grab the latest version of Java from Apple:

Intel J2SE 5 update

PPC 2SE 5 update

Install the update and then open the Java Preferences app in the J2SE 5 folder that lives in the Java folder in the Utilities folder.

Now, this is where I'm talking out of my ass, but I found a page of java tweaks and I tried a few and LC is definitely snappier:

Java Virtual Machine Options

Under Java Applet Runtime Parameters I increased the heap size, the max memory and code cash. I honestly don't know what made a difference but that was where I started. It would be wonderful if someone with Java knowledge would chime in. Even better if a coder from Leaf would take a look. This is what my parameters look like:

-XX:MaxDirectMemorySize=256M -XX:ReservedCodeCacheSize=128M -Xms 40960 -Xmx -server

Like I said, this made a difference on my dual G5 1.8 but your mileage may vary.
Logged

Bob Croslin, Photographer
http://www.bobcroslin.com
pprdigital
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #17 on: December 27, 2006, 10:30:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
After giving up on LC 10 I thought no one likes a quitter so I did some research and posted a question to another forum hoping to get some answers on apps written in java. There's a few simple tweaks that can be made to the java engine in OS X that I believe produced snappier results from the UI of LC 10.

First, go grab the latest version of Java from Apple:

Intel J2SE 5 update

PPC 2SE 5 update

Install the update and then open the Java Preferences app in the J2SE 5 folder that lives in the Java folder in the Utilities folder.

Now, this is where I'm talking out of my ass, but I found a page of java tweaks and I tried a few and LC is definitely snappier:

Java Virtual Machine Options

Under Java Applet Runtime Parameters I increased the heap size, the max memory and code cash. I honestly don't know what made a difference but that was where I started. It would be wonderful if someone with Java knowledge would chime in. Even better if a coder from Leaf would take a look. This is what my parameters look like:

-XX:MaxDirectMemorySize=256M -XX:ReservedCodeCacheSize=128M -Xms 40960 -Xmx -server

Like I said, this made a difference on my dual G5 1.8 but your mileage may vary.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92578\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Bob, this is good stuff. Thanks for passing it on.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
Logged

Steve Hendrix
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4259



« Reply #18 on: December 28, 2006, 05:03:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The real issue is not just the look of the file, or can a file be corrected, it's how fast you can get there and more importatnly how reliably.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92147\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

James,

This is an issue we can debate without offending any manufacturer

The current trend, at least in 35mm seems to be to make bodies (backs) that shoot something, and then you correct later. At best the out-of-the-box look is needy of correction (1DsII), at worst (Leica M8) it is deeply flawed.

As a result, the photographer has three jobs: Once in the shoot, 1) making the files, then in post he needs to 2) establish a set of corrections, lastly he needs to 3) apply them to the selects.

My suggestion is to ask the manufacturers to bring back he film days: Have preloaded "looks" such that you decide which you will use at the time when you shoot, and little need for phases 2 and 3 above.

Of course, this may require more precision with light balance etc during shooting, but at least it stresses the creation of the look back as an aim of the shooting setup.

James is concerned about color, but many have simply given up. I am getting sick of all the purposely whited-out or greened-out browned-out images I see out there where the retouchers have given up all hope of retrieving decent color from a file which has clearly been originated by the most expensive equipment, but shot carelessly...

By the way, I don't want to say this too loudly in the MF forum, but these days I'm getting seriously good images from my cellphone when the lighting is there. I think I could probably do a model shoot with that phone if I used very strong continuous light.  (Nokia N93, 3 MP Zeiss zoom lens) . Some of the partcipants here might recall a certain story about a Polaroid Swinger that was posted in RG before the Great Wipe ...

Edmund
« Last Edit: December 28, 2006, 05:17:16 AM by eronald » Logged
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #19 on: December 28, 2006, 09:05:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
James,

This is an issue we can debate without offending any manufacturer

The current trend, at least in 35mm seems to be to make bodies (backs) that shoot something, and then you correct later. At best the out-of-the-box look is needy of correction (1DsII), at worst (Leica M8) it is deeply flawed.

We're not put on this earth to please manufactuerer's, we're put here to make photographs.

Nothing is perfect but if all the manufacturer's had to shoot with clients that wanted to see beautiful color on set, or had to view their lcd's on white rooftops or even better had to drag thier bum's back into a hotel room in Orlando and make 2000 jpegs for a web gallery in an evening, then I can promise you all of this equipment and software would be very, very, very different.

Given this, I don't think any photographer gets up in the morning thinking today I'll try and piss someone off.  I do think they get up and think, dammit  today I've got to correct all those jpegs I made last night with software that crashed a dozen times.

I assume the manufactuerer's come on here to either learn or do damage control.

If they come on here to learn, then it is all laid out for them.

Damage control is really the easy part, make it work as promised and there is no damage to control.


JR
« Last Edit: December 28, 2006, 09:05:56 AM by James Russell » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad