Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Leaf Aptus 65 for $13,995!  (Read 21110 times)
Sean H
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #40 on: June 26, 2008, 08:23:32 AM »
ReplyReply

James,

that was a really thought-provoking piece you wrote (I didn't want to copy the whole post below). I think that many of the points you make seem logical...and it portends a future that's somewhat disturbing and, perhaps, exciting at the same time. We are seeing so much change in our lifetimes and the pace seems to be accelerating in many scientific fields, and now also in photography.

I hope that other thoughtful and knowledgeable members comment.

Thanks,

Sean

Quote
Well, thanks but there is a flip side to this.

Right now I think it's obvious that medium format digital capture is in a fight for it's life.


JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203741\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Snook
Guest
« Reply #41 on: June 26, 2008, 09:17:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
James,

that was a really thought-provoking piece you wrote (I didn't want to copy the whole post below). I think that many of the points you make seem logical...and it portends a future that's somewhat disturbing and, perhaps, exciting at the same time. We are seeing so much change in our lifetimes and the pace seems to be accelerating in many scientific fields, and now also in photography.

I hope that other thoughtful and knowledgeable members comment.

Thanks,

Sean
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203787\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree with everything in here and wanted to add that I feel that the new revolutionary new Mamiya/Phase camera falls quite short of anything "new"
Is it going to be a giant Flop for them...?
After all what did they really change? If any changes they are slight.
For crying out loud how can you make a new camera and still have it syncing at 125/th in 2008?
Canon stinks also but at least it is 250/th with flash.

Just when I was getting all excited about my P30 and RZII combo...:+}

Also I do not know what all the hype is about dealers in here.. I do believe they should be marked "dealer" like james says but I do not find them Pushy or anything...
We all new they would start squirming when the D3 and Canon 1DsMIII came out.
I personally did not ever like canons and do not think the 1DsMIII is that much of an upgrade when the 1DsMII was fine..?
I do think Phase should get their act together and work on their software and LCD screen instead of making stupid commercials with Jeeps parked on top of their MFDB's!!
Digital photography has become the double edged sword...
Sure is welcome but has Flooded the market with less than professional photographers.
Every retoucher I know has suddenly switched to Photographer and trying to cut out the middle man..:+}
Really quite disappointing.
Luckily it seems the trend is coming back to Clean and untouched photography!!
Sure would be a breathe of fresh air compared to all the David Hill wanna bees going around these days...:+}
Snook
Logged
Gigi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 429


WWW
« Reply #42 on: June 26, 2008, 12:52:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I too appreciate James posts. They are a breath of fresh air - sometimes a bit particular, but usually right on the mark.

In shopping for a digital back (serious amateur) the cost of MFDB is clearly going through some changes. Not just the hassy price on the 31 MP, and the Leaf, but also just learned Hassy is now promoting a 503 CWD II, for $13k (educ. discount to $11.5).

What is interesting is that 'till the end of July its avail with a swap out of the 40 mm FLE lens instead of the 80 mm for the same price. Nice.

Whatever one thinks of the camera/back/price, the fact is that the deal has clearly the trace of some marketing savvy in place. Someone's thinking....
Logged

Geoff
Caracalla
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156



WWW
« Reply #43 on: June 26, 2008, 02:31:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I do think Phase should get their act together and work on their software and LCD screen instead of making stupid commercials with Jeeps parked on top of their MFDB's!!

Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203795\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That is exactly how I feel, they should put their effort against their shortcomings and stop singing or shouting how strong or good they are. I say that as a very happy Phase P45+/P30+ owner and hope too se the new bigger LCD, better ISO (better than just good quallity 400 ISO), better capture rate!!!


Quote
Luckily it seems the trend is coming back to Clean and untouched photography!!
Sure would be a breathe of fresh air compared to all the David Hill wanna bees going around these days...:+}
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203795\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I know David personally and he couldn't care less about David Hill, Jill Greenberg, Andrzej Dragan or Douglas Fisher (implementing +3D Architecture)  wanna bees...

He learned his formula by mistake.... it happened that his client liked it... so he liked it... and that is how it became David Hills look!

James opinion is ROCK SOLID!!!  Now imagine if Phase, Leaf, Sinar or Hasselblad would pay (part time at least) James/others to advise on future platforms, do you think in future we'll be going backwards? Most probably not!
Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #44 on: June 26, 2008, 02:36:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I agree with everything in here and wanted to add that I feel that the new revolutionary new Mamiya/Phase camera falls quite short of anything "new"
Is it going to be a giant Flop for them...?
After all what did they really change? If any changes they are slight.
For crying out loud how can you make a new camera and still have it syncing at 125/th in 2008?
Canon stinks also but at least it is 250/th with flash.

Just when I was getting all excited about my P30 and RZII combo...:+}

Also I do not know what all the hype is about dealers in here.. I do believe they should be marked "dealer" like james says but I do not find them Pushy or anything...
We all new they would start squirming when the D3 and Canon 1DsMIII came out.
I personally did not ever like canons and do not think the 1DsMIII is that much of an upgrade when the 1DsMII was fine..?
I do think Phase should get their act together and work on their software and LCD screen instead of making stupid commercials with Jeeps parked on top of their MFDB's!!
Digital photography has become the double edged sword...
Sure is welcome but has Flooded the market with less than professional photographers.
Every retoucher I know has suddenly switched to Photographer and trying to cut out the middle man..:+}
Really quite disappointing.
Luckily it seems the trend is coming back to Clean and untouched photography!!
Sure would be a breathe of fresh air compared to all the David Hill wanna bees going around these days...:+}
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203795\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Once they get the leaf shutter lenses and hopefully a fast 110 (this is a magic lens for medium format), this camera should do anything that the blad and the hy6 will do other than have a waist level finder, which is limited on the blad, somewhat limited on the leaf since you have to remove the back and only really fully functional on the Sinar.

Regardless of what the others offere,  I wouldn't consider it a flop it's just because it's not ground breaking.  

Then again I guess the Canon 1ds3 from the 2 isn't really ground breaking either.

As we keep illustrating the only real ground breaking system is in video with the Red.

Now if I was Phase, I'd be all over Mamiya to make the RZ with a more magnified finder for focusing  and crop marks that  moved when rotated and exactly refelected the digital sensor.

Then the two cameras for one back idea makes a lot of sense, or an improved RZ would be a less expensive HY6 with manual focus.

There is a lot of value in the thought of two compatiable systems for one back, since the RZ is more a studio type of camera and it's not a platform I would give up on just yet.

There is also the thought that there is a big user installed base of RZ owners with a closet full for glass so maybe that's a new market just ready for the taking.


JR
« Last Edit: June 26, 2008, 02:41:29 PM by James R Russell » Logged

paul_jones
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565


WWW
« Reply #45 on: June 26, 2008, 03:18:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Once they get the leaf shutter lenses and hopefully a fast 110 (this is a magic lens for medium format), this camera should do anything that the blad and the hy6 will do other than have a waist level finder, which is limited on the blad, somewhat limited on the leaf since you have to remove the back and only really fully functional on the Sinar.

Regardless of what the others offere,  I wouldn't consider it a flop it's just because it's not ground breaking. 

Then again I guess the Canon 1ds3 from the 2 isn't really ground breaking either.

As we keep illustrating the only real ground breaking system is in video with the Red.

Now if I was Phase, I'd be all over Mamiya to make the RZ with a more magnified finder for focusing  and crop marks that  moved when rotated and exactly refelected the digital sensor.

Then the two cameras for one back idea makes a lot of sense, or an improved RZ would be a less expensive HY6 with manual focus.

There is a lot of value in the thought of two compatiable systems for one back, since the RZ is more a studio type of camera and it's not a platform I would give up on just yet.

There is also the thought that there is a big user installed base of RZ owners with a closet full for glass so maybe that's a new market just ready for the taking.
JR
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i really like the rz. i dont know if its possible, but having a back mount on the rz that had shifts (is that right term?) so that you could stitch if you wanted would be way cool.
then you get advantage of that very large viewing area, as long as you are shooting static things.
like the gx680/kapture group system-
[a href=\"http://www.kapturegroup.com/fuji_stitch/fuji_examples.html]http://www.kapturegroup.com/fuji_stitch/fuji_examples.html[/url]

i also think the option of leaf lenses with high sync and the option of focal plane for really high ambient shots is far more usefull than just one system with 800/1000 flash sync. so mamiya 645 option could be really great.

paul
Logged

check my new website
http://www.paulrossjones.com
Caracalla
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156



WWW
« Reply #46 on: June 26, 2008, 07:34:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
There is also the thought that there is a big user installed base of RZ owners with a [span style=\'font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\']closet full for glass[/span] so maybe that's a new market just ready for the taking.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203846\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


James, are you sure you don't have Nostradamus somewhere hiding in your Family tree???  

[span style=\'font-size:11pt;line-height:100%\']You my friend are razor sharp & scary perceptive!!!![/span]  

Now, was I wrong.... these companies should listen to you/others?

I usually don't bother posting pictures, but this time I had to  
« Last Edit: June 26, 2008, 07:41:23 PM by Caracalla » Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 26, 2008, 11:47:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
James, are you sure you don't have Nostradamus somewhere hiding in your Family tree???  

[span style=\'font-size:11pt;line-height:100%\']You my friend are razor sharp & scary perceptive!!!![/span]  

Now, was I wrong.... these companies should listen to you/others?

I usually don't bother posting pictures, but this time I had to   
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203877\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


The strangest thing about medium format is if you asked why and RZ can't have new cropping blades to match the sensors, or a more magnified viewfinder, somebody connected with the medium format world will explain why it can't be done, then point you over to an HY6, an H3d2 (is that correct?) or a Phase/Mamiya 645.

Earlier I illustrated how my friend in LA went into the biggest store in the city to buy a P-30+ for his contax and was told it would take weeks to get one, they tried to sell him a blad.

I sent him my p30+ to try.

If you ask somebody in the medium format digital world why, they will tell you it's too expensive to keep a lot of stock.  If you ask them why all the backs don't have interchangeable mounts they will tell you there is no market for it.

If you ask somebody connected with the 35mm digital world, well they just won't tell you anything.

Once again I find it a very unique business the making and selling of professional cameras in the digital world.

Medium format has lost a huge part of their market, especially the makers of cameras and once again somebody from the medium format world will tell you why, but the real reason is medium format gave a huge chunk of the professional market to Canon for the reasons that the Canons cost less, they are easier to use, the lenses are cheaper and you can buy one on any corner on any day of the week without waiting.

It's a heartbreaker to look at that closet of RZ equipment, knowing it wouldn't take much to put it back in service and to also know that nobody seems to be listening.

I think Mamiya more than anyone is missing a large ready and waiting market, not updating the RZ.


JR
Logged

203
Guest
« Reply #48 on: June 27, 2008, 07:48:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think Mamiya more than anyone is missing a large ready and waiting market, not updating the RZ.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203912\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I bet once you remove all those who moved to 35, *and all those who now expect AutoFocus,* there is not a large market left at all. I think it's the manual focus which is holding that camera back. Plus there are no backs to really fit it.
(I really liked using the RZ, but many of my shots on film were simply not in focus, though I was trying my hardest.)
Developing the RZ must make even less sense when you consider that even the 645 is already too large for the available (cropped) backs.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2008, 07:58:35 AM by 203 » Logged
Snook
Guest
« Reply #49 on: June 27, 2008, 08:26:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
James, are you sure you don't have Nostradamus somewhere hiding in your Family tree???  

[span style=\'font-size:11pt;line-height:100%\']You my friend are razor sharp & scary perceptive!!!![/span]  

Now, was I wrong.... these companies should listen to you/others?

I usually don't bother posting pictures, but this time I had to   
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203877\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Time for ebay?
:+}
Snook
Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #50 on: June 27, 2008, 10:30:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Time for ebay?
:+}
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203975\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think the day will come when optical viewfinders will be a thing of the past.

I know to some this sounds like heresy, but it just doesn't make sense to keep looking down bent mirrors and tiny ground plastic that blacks out every-time you shoot a frame.

I've done it for years and can manually focus even my cropped contax's but it's ain't easy.

If you used the Nikon D3 and seen what detail a 900,000 pixel lcd looks like then you know that it's going to come and by then cameras will probably look a lot different than what we have today.

Now whether medium format does this is another matter, because they still can't give us a small lcd as good as the original canon 1ds, but if they don't somebody will.

So E-bay, your probably right, but all it takes is some company to revolutionize the way we shoot and display and at that point everything goes on e-bay.

Just like the 1ds vs. the original Kodak digital dslrs, someday we'll probably look back at the medium format cameras and just shake our heads that we paid $30,000 and went through so many workarounds.

I think all professional still cameras are now in between a rock and a hard place and need to decide what they are going to be.

Somewhere, somehow, they need to get past the reply that good lcds, lower costs, wi-fi, higher iso, is just not feasable.

Right now it seems all the medium format companies pretty much offer the same thing under a different logo.  Some are more stable than others, some are faster, some are stronger, but all of them are working from two sensor makers and living off of some form of legacy film camera.

I am sure this will eventually change.

JR
« Last Edit: June 27, 2008, 10:41:00 AM by James R Russell » Logged

Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #51 on: June 27, 2008, 10:38:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think the day will come when optical viewfinders will be a thing of the past.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203999\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well the technology already exists to capture first and focus later, which removes the need for any focusing at all! At the moment it is low resolution and expensive but anything is possible.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #52 on: June 27, 2008, 11:01:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Well the technology already exists to capture first and focus later, which removes the need for any focusing at all! At the moment it is low resolution and expensive but anything is possible.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204004\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Since the point of focus is a big part of the artistic process, I doubt seriously if anyone wants to shoot a bunch of fuzzy photos and decide on the focus point later.

Don't think for a moment though that any of us wouldn't like a 4x5 focusing screeen that played in real time and didn't black out.  Think about it, almost like a live video feed and everytime you pressed the button for the moment, it gets tagged with a dot.

Probably by then we will have a real live feed to clients also (this may not be a positive), but then again by then we will probably be shooting one continuous segment rather than frame by frame.

JR
Logged

SeanBK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #53 on: June 27, 2008, 11:04:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Well the technology already exists to capture first and focus later, which removes the need for any focusing at all! At the moment it is low resolution and expensive but anything is possible.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204004\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Graham, You are right. In issue 1/2007 of "Victor" magazine by Hasselblad on pg 45 there is an article "Shoot first, focus later" (authored by Michael Hussman) does shed intersesting light on "Light field technology".
Logged
bart alexander
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #54 on: June 27, 2008, 11:31:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think the day will come when optical viewfinders will be a thing of the past.

I know to some this sounds like heresy, but it just doesn't make sense to keep looking down bent mirrors and tiny ground plastic that blacks out every-time you shoot a frame.

I've done it for years and can manually focus even my cropped contax's but it's ain't easy.

If you used the Nikon D3 and seen what detail a 900,000 pixel lcd looks like then you know that it's going to come and by then cameras will probably look a lot different than what we have today.

Now whether medium format does this is another matter, because they still can't give us a small lcd as good as the original canon 1ds, but if they don't somebody will.

So E-bay, your probably right, but all it takes is some company to revolutionize the way we shoot and display and at that point everything goes on e-bay.

Just like the 1ds vs. the original Kodak digital dslrs, someday we'll probably look back at the medium format cameras and just shake our heads that we paid $30,000 and went through so many workarounds.

I think all professional still cameras are now in between a rock and a hard place and need to decide what they are going to be.

Somewhere, somehow, they need to get past the reply that good lcds, lower costs, wi-fi, higher iso, is just not feasable.

Right now it seems all the medium format companies pretty much offer the same thing under a different logo.  Some are more stable than others, some are faster, some are stronger, but all of them are working from two sensor makers and living off of some form of legacy film camera.

I am sure this will eventually change.

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203999\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Exactly what I was thinking. I've asked in the DPreview D3 forum if anyone uses live view and noone seems to use it, can you imagine? For manufacturers but also for consumers / pros it seems very hard to think for themselves rather than to do again what has been done all the way, but then "digital". A good D3 high resolution LCD is very nice ofcourse and I'd love it on any camera, but you don't even need it for focussing, since AF is done on the sensor. So, what you aim for, you'll know it will be in focus, (OK I know, some are still using manual focus lenses and then it may come in handy, but with good AF manual lenses aren't really needed anymore.) I have done this several times with a G9 and the focus is always spot on. But then again, on a G9 the shutter delay is very laid back   ) But the D3 is a good start. Any "LCD finder camera" that could shoot as fast as a D3 while using the optical viewfinder, would be perfect. I'm imagining an RZ with an "in between 6x7 high resolution LCD" that can be mounted on top of an RZ and any finder will fit: waist level or prism finders. And a digital Mamiya 7 with a 4x5 size LCD on the back, man second hand prices would suddenly go sky high again for the existing lenses and RZ bodies. And everyone would be happy. Doesn't even take that much R&D. Sensors can stay as small as they are now for now, for who cares if they are tiny, if the view is huge and precise and the files perfect? "Not that hard to imagine" ha ha.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2008, 11:36:41 AM by bart alexander » Logged
E_Edwards
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 228


« Reply #55 on: June 27, 2008, 06:09:20 PM »
ReplyReply

I  personally think that auto-focus is overrated.

Like most photographers who have been around for a long time, I moved from manual focussing to autofocus as soon as the first autofocus cameras started to appear in the market. I continued using autofocus until recently.

I was never quite happy with autofocus, but I didn't know why. I found that out of a quick burst of say, 20 to 30 frames, a good percentage of frames were... kind of not quite as focussed as I had wished, not as pin sharp, the focus being either a little forward or a little backward and a few were completely unusable. Basically when you focus on the eyes, you expect the sharpness to be there, with every eyelash absolutely pin sharp.

Well, it just wasn't, not always.

So I did a little experiment. I shot a similar 30 fast frames, with the model moving, with me moving up and down, close and far, as you do when you shoot models, at a rapid pace...but this time, I focussed manually. Immediately the percentage of pin sharp pictures increased to almost 100 per cent.

I tried it a few times, first auto-focus, then again manually, and as I become confident again with manual focus, to my surprise,  I found that I could focus faster manually than automatically (locking the autofocus to frame the subject where you want it to be can waste a few milliseconds).

Now I focus exclusively manually, and I shoot as fast as the Broncolor packs can recycle. I feel so liberated and happy to go back to something that always works, gives you instant control as to where you want to place your focus, (or de-focus for that matter) it's more instinctive and in a way, it's a bit like reclaiming something that was lost with all this furore for auto this an auto that.

Try it, it may take a little practice to go back to manual, but provided you eyesight is good, I guarantee that you will be amazed at how much more productive you can become.

Edward
« Last Edit: June 28, 2008, 02:19:48 AM by E_Edwards » Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #56 on: June 28, 2008, 11:02:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I  personally think that auto-focus is overrated.

Like most photographers who have been around for a long time, I moved from manual focussing to autofocus as soon as the first autofocus cameras started to appear in the market. I continued using autofocus until recently.

I was never quite happy with autofocus, but I didn't know why. I found that out of a quick burst of say, 20 to 30 frames, a good percentage of frames were... kind of not quite as focussed as I had wished, not as pin sharp, the focus being either a little forward or a little backward and a few were completely unusable. Basically when you focus on the eyes, you expect the sharpness to be there, with every eyelash absolutely pin sharp.

Well, it just wasn't, not always.

So I did a little experiment. I shot a similar 30 fast frames, with the model moving, with me moving up and down, close and far, as you do when you shoot models, at a rapid pace...but this time, I focussed manually. Immediately the percentage of pin sharp pictures increased to almost 100 per cent.

I tried it a few times, first auto-focus, then again manually, and as I become confident again with manual focus, to my surprise,  I found that I could focus faster manually than automatically (locking the autofocus to frame the subject where you want it to be can waste a few milliseconds).

Now I focus exclusively manually, and I shoot as fast as the Broncolor packs can recycle. I feel so liberated and happy to go back to something that always works, gives you instant control as to where you want to place your focus, (or de-focus for that matter) it's more instinctive and in a way, it's a bit like reclaiming something that was lost with all this furore for auto this an auto that.

Try it, it may take a little practice to go back to manual, but provided you eyesight is good, I guarantee that you will be amazed at how much more productive you can become.

Edward
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204082\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I agree.  It's funny when I never used autofocus much until I went to the Canon 1ds.  Then I used it all the time and found all of my little workarounds and focus points and honestly that's just as much effort as manually focusing, maybe more.

Then with the Contax I constantly move it around from continuous focus, to single focus to manual, but after the day is done I probably shoot 85% manual focus and it frees me up in a lot of ways, especailly since you aren't trying to find something to focus on, your just composing, focusing and shooting.

At first it was difficult getting back to manual focus, but now it's just normal.

JR
Logged

Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #57 on: June 28, 2008, 11:12:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Since the point of focus is a big part of the artistic process, I doubt seriously if anyone wants to shoot a bunch of fuzzy photos and decide on the focus point later.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204008\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have a feeling from your answer that you don't know what I'm referring to. I'll try and find a link later if you're interested.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #58 on: June 28, 2008, 11:23:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have a feeling from your answer that you don't know what I'm referring to. I'll try and find a link later if you're interested.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204187\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I read the article a while back, actually glanced at the article because I found it as non interesting as those japanese websites where they have found a way to CG people and make them look "almost" real, or that guy that wrote that flicker program where you can type in "replace the lamp post with a tree" and the software magically does it.

None of this really applies to me and I hope it never does.

I'm aware that the toothpaste is out of the tube and if you think about it, just about every photograph that could ever be shot is probably out there floating on the web just ready for the next Richard Prince to copy, manipulate and change it to their heart's content, including correcting the focus.

I understand what your saying and maybe we will eventually get a camera where you can focus, light, reposition all in post,  but to be blunt, it really doesn't interest me because the more we do on the back end, usually by committee, the more the photographer becomes marginalized.

For obvious reasons that not something I would not look forward to.


JR
« Last Edit: June 28, 2008, 11:36:55 AM by James R Russell » Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 4212



« Reply #59 on: June 28, 2008, 02:50:09 PM »
ReplyReply

On a side note, re focus, I played around with a NikonD3. The viewfinder is not as much fun as the Canon or MF, but the focus is *fast*.

Edmund
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad