Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Gurski  (Read 12255 times)
billy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


« Reply #40 on: June 05, 2009, 08:55:09 AM »
ReplyReply


The other unknown in this topic is how well CS4 does with stitching files that are not perfect. The AutoMerge feature of CS4 is worth the upgrade price, alone. It is amazingly effective. CS4 might make all these other issues not worth messing with -- just get close, and let CS4 AutoMerge do the rest.
[/quote]


I have never used this feature ( still on CS3 ) but it sounds great. when I shoot landscapes I shoot 3 exposures, left, center, right, at the same exposure but not on a tripod. then i put them together manually in photoshop but i always have problems with lens casts ( edges seem to be less saturated or underexposed etc ). does this auto merge feature fix this?
Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #41 on: June 05, 2009, 08:58:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: gwhitf
So now i have a new thing to be paranoid about
 
Quote
Why put an f32 or 45 on a lens, if it's not sharp?
on film it's different and as long as we talk about film lenses there's nothing wrong to put smaller apertures on a lens.
Quote
I do know that on that Contax 80mm lens (yes, Zeiss), that, at f2 wide open, there was absolutely nowhere that was tack sharp. Not even close.
in this thread http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....=34950&st=0 I've posted examples of the Planar 2.0/80 on P45 (page1) and P21+ (page2). Well, not "tack sharp", but for some purposes one may use it wide open, esp. on the P21+ with its wider pixel pitch. For landscape and such f2.0 is maybe not the way to go...

Quote
What is a generall acceptable "green line" range for a Technical Camera lens? No smaller than f11?
be aware that it has nothing to do with tech camera or the lens. It has to do with the pixel pitch of the specific back. With your P45+ (6.8 microns) I'd say don't stop down beyond f16. F16 is already somewhat soft (not really soft but you'll lose some contrast compared to f11)... but I use f16 frequently and find it still very good (again: this applies to all my Contax lenses as well as to a Digitar 47XL with the P45).
You may have a look here (maybe not the best site in the world but a vivid one): http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials...photography.htm
Alpa recommends to use f8 and f11:
http://www.alpa.ch/knowledgebase/questions...n+Digital+Rules
Quote
5) Generally,  the f-stops between f 8 and f 11 should be used.
A few lenses allow for max. 4.0, 4.5 or f 5.6 - and even they get better at e.g. f 8. In any case: one rule remains - avoid f 16 and forget about f 22, etc. The reason: diffraction.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2009, 09:25:33 AM by tho_mas » Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #42 on: June 05, 2009, 09:21:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: billy
then i put them together manually in photoshop but i always have problems with lens casts ( edges seem to be less saturated or underexposed etc ). does this auto merge feature fix this?
I use the merger in CS4 for the stitiching only - no correction of perspective or anything else. This is what the tool is doing really good.
To correct luminance and colour shifts I think Autopano Pro does a very good job (don't use it, but many say so...)
Logged
PeterA
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123


« Reply #43 on: June 05, 2009, 09:33:21 AM »
ReplyReply

The Alpa is a very simple and very robust piece of equipment which mates beautifully to most digital backs. Basically it is a well made square frame on to which one attaches their choice of Rodenstock or Schnieder lens in helical mount. Stitching requires the use of a simple sliding mechanism from RRS or and/purchasing a bulkier frame with inbuilt horizontal and vertical shifts ( ala MAX or XY) - nodal point stitching by way of a sliding mount is easy. the more difficult aspect is focus unless shooting@ recommended aperture range f8-11 and a wide angle - you have pretty much 1 meter to infinity in acceptable focus.

The only thing that Alpa doesn't deliver is tilts and swings - for that go traditional view camera or even better with made for digital Sinar arTec.

The other non quantifiable joy in using an Alpa is just walking around with a wide angle attached and shooting pure an simple - you making all necessary decision without inbuilt anything - it s a great editorial /reportage/street shooting machine.
Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #44 on: June 05, 2009, 09:34:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: gwhitf
What I was going to do was take the Canon 45TS or the 24TS, and get some kind of metal rod or bracket, and JB Weld the rod to the chassis of the tilt lens. And then attach an RRS type tripod bracket to that. You'd have to pretty much chuck the resellability of the lens, but if it worked, it would be great. The LENS would mount to the tripod, and the camera body would doing the moving around. The lens stays fixed, so that it stitches pixel to pixel without any issues (or lens cast mess).

No idea if it would work, but I see no reason why it wouldn't. I'm almost amazed that Canon came out with a whole new generation of those TS lenses, and didn't add the ability to mount the LENS to the tripod, instead of the body. Because, if you're going to reach for a TS lens, pretty good odds that you're stitching. If Canon had added some high-tech-looking brackets and mounts to those TS lenses, they could have charged double compared to the previous generation. Stick on a James Russell-manufactured Sinar/Alpa/Arca/Cambo sticker, and the value goes up even more.

The other unknown in this topic is how well CS4 does with stitching files that are not perfect. The AutoMerge feature of CS4 is worth the upgrade price, alone. It is amazingly effective. CS4 might make all these other issues not worth messing with -- just get close, and let CS4 AutoMerge do the rest.


Just buy the stickers.  It's a lot more cost effective because you buy a Canon with a tse lens and 10 minutes later it's a Sinar and when you get bored with your Sinar, wah-lah, you got yourself a new Alpa.

I do it with my Pontiac.  Since they're gone, now i'm driving an Audi for $19, if they go bust, then I've got a BMW.

Sticker's are perfect for our economic times.

JR

Logged

CBarrett
Guest
« Reply #45 on: June 05, 2009, 10:02:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PeterA
The other non quantifiable joy in using an Alpa is just walking around with a wide angle attached and shooting pure an simple - you making all necessary decision without inbuilt anything - it s a great editorial /reportage/street shooting machine.

No argument there!  It's what makes me want a TC or a SWA and maybe just one lens even though I have the view camera and am placing my Phamiya 645 order on Monday.  I expect that walking around Chicago with the TC would be really reminiscent of the days I spent with nothing but a Leica CL, 35 mm lens and a pocket full of Tri X.

As for lenses and diffraction.  I have tested all my lenses and find that I can stop down as they get longer, but that only makes sense.... for two reasons:

1.  f/11 on a 135mm is a bigger hole than f/11 on a 35mm and unless common sense fails me, the light is not nearly as "bent"
2.  when focused, the longer lenses are further away from the DB than the shorter lenses and the angle of incidence is much more within the back's desirable range (which is why the LCC files on my 90 and 70 hardly ever show color shifts)

Given all that crap.... here's where I'm most often at:

  35mm : f/11
  45mm : f/11
  55mm : f/11.5
  70mm : f/16
  90mm : f/16-22
135mm : f/22
Logged
schaubild
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #46 on: June 05, 2009, 04:38:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PeterA
...
The only thing that Alpa doesn't deliver is tilts and swings - for that go traditional view camera or even better with made for digital Sinar arTec.

....


Little correction: a tilt adapter is available since last year.

http://www.alpa.ch/index.php?lang=en&p...p;detailpage=82

Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #47 on: June 05, 2009, 04:55:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: schaubild
Little correction: a tilt adapter is available since last year.
http://www.alpa.ch/index.php?lang=en&p...p;detailpage=82


http://www.alpa.ch/image.php?file=files/ne...mp;output=thumb
http://www.alpa.ch/image.php?file=files/ne...mp;output=thumb

do you know if the adaptor is rotatable 360 and is the zero setting locked (looks like in the the image)?
Logged
schaubild
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #48 on: June 05, 2009, 05:24:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tho_mas
http://www.alpa.ch/image.php?file=files/ne...mp;output=thumb
http://www.alpa.ch/image.php?file=files/ne...mp;output=thumb

do you know if the adaptor is rotatable 360 and is the zero setting locked (looks like in the the image)?


It can be rotated in 90 degree steps.
The tilt is geared and goes to one side only, there is no movement below zero degrees.
Logged
free1000
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


WWW
« Reply #49 on: June 05, 2009, 05:24:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I thought that Hal Foster made a great observation in 'Design and Crime' when he said that Andreas Gursky almost succeeds in 'routinizing the uncanny' http://bit.ly/11LZ0b

It has been quite an achievement to reprise abstract expressionism within photography, in a milieu which appears at first to be a kind of deadpan, banal, documentary aesthetic. Thats what makes Gursky so great, and expensive. We still love something the size of a Jackson Pollock and if I was rich enough, I'd want them on my walls provided they are made by a German.
 
I'll get my coat...
Logged

@foliobook
Foliobook professional photography folio for iPad
www.foliobook.mobi
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #50 on: June 05, 2009, 05:51:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: free1000
Thats what makes Gursky so great, and expensive.
That's an aspect of what makes him so great.
No Artist is expensive just because of the quality of his works.... Gursky is so expensive because he knows how the art market works.
Yet he deserves the success as he really has a substantial concept.
Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #51 on: June 05, 2009, 05:52:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: schaubild
It can be rotated in 90 degree steps.
The tilt is geared and goes to one side only, there is no movement below zero degrees.
Thank you!
Logged
rethmeier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 775


WWW
« Reply #52 on: June 05, 2009, 07:51:47 PM »
ReplyReply

http://www.wallpaper.com/art/andreas-gursk...n-new-york/2792


 A $3.34 million price tag is not bad going for a print.

Good on him and it is great PR for Alpa.
Logged

Willem Rethmeier
www.willemrethmeier.com
Sydney Australia
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 998


WWW
« Reply #53 on: June 06, 2009, 01:29:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rethmeier
http://www.wallpaper.com/art/andreas-gursk...n-new-york/2792


 A $3.34 million price tag is not bad going for a print.

Good on him and it is great PR for Alpa.
Think our friend Andreas got model releases for all of the people in that shot?  Probably a lot of identifiable faces in a large print.  Not my favorite of his, but someone seems to have been partial to it.  With a print that pricey, you probably match the sofa and the drapes to the print, instead of the other way around.
Logged

tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #54 on: June 06, 2009, 03:20:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Colorwave
Probably a lot of identifiable faces in a large print.
you can identify all the faces in that print...
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #55 on: June 06, 2009, 02:12:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Colorwave
Think our friend Andreas got model releases for all of the people in that shot?  Probably a lot of identifiable faces in a large print.  Not my favorite of his, but someone seems to have been partial to it.  With a print that pricey, you probably match the sofa and the drapes to the print, instead of the other way around.
Selling art work is not 'commercial' use; you don't need model releases. This has been held up in court on multiple cases, including a recent high-profile case in NY (can't recall the photographer's name off the top of my head).
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad