Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: >61MP image files for peepers  (Read 30058 times)
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #80 on: October 09, 2010, 05:30:19 AM »
ReplyReply

snip...

Maybe it is my lack of long years experience, maybe it is because my relativly young age...

I'll risk leaping to Fred's defence here.

I admire his passion and enthusiasm. He has it seems had his head turned by one or two of the more experienced photographers on LL and in particular JR, or should that be BC, hell, to avoid confusion I'll refer to him here as JC.
I can think of worse photographers to look up to and try to emulate, in fact I can think of few better, and this is a positive. However, sometimes "beginners" - not my words - or as I'll refer to them here, disciples, are best served by speaking less and listening more. Photographers such as JC, and others, have a wealth of knowledge and have formed opinion based on a wealth of experience.

I don't doubt that given the opportunity he's been given, together with his passion and enthusiasm, Fred will go on to greater things and in time also have a wealth of knowledge and experience to share. I wish him luck.

 
« Last Edit: October 09, 2010, 05:33:48 AM by KLaban » Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7427


WWW
« Reply #81 on: October 09, 2010, 08:13:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Great comment, BC!

Best regards
Erik


Nick,

I don't know if I fully agree, because usually more megapixels come with more features (this latest leaf excluded).  In the instance of the h4d40 it has higher iso and a larger screen than the previous model.

I've personally thought about a hd40 but would be quite happy with the 31, except the 40 is reported to be cleaner at 800 iso, though even with the dslrs I cut the iso number in half because they all seem to overstate what is clean and sharp.

Though if your premise holds true and the makers just play to the market, will we soon see an H 80mpx, a Phase 85+?

Regardless, I think rather than worry about what my cameras don't have, I think more like in the film days of what can I do with them that they allow.  With the Phase backs I have to tether because the lcd is really not usable, but I've found ways to make that work for me.

Now if medium format wants to really improve their market share I suggest finding someway to get the older cameras in the hands of younger photographers.  Our first assistant is a true digital age photographer and has never shot film, mostly shot his portfolio, (which is quite good) with a Canon 5d and 5d2.  Recently I've let him take my Contax's and backs on weekends to use for his work and now it's almost impossible to get them returned when he comes in on Monday.

I believe if there was a 31mpx option closer to the price of the Canon he'd buy it, or if the used market was more friendly in regards to repairs and dealer/maker support he'd probably go that direction.

I really think there should be a manufacturer's refurbished line of cameras, kind of the way the car makers do vehicles that have come off lease.  It would be a good entry point.

BC

Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #82 on: October 09, 2010, 09:33:38 AM »
ReplyReply

I'll risk leaping to Fred's defence here.

I admire his passion and enthusiasm. He has it seems had his head turned by one or two of the more experienced photographers on LL and in particular JR, or should that be BC, hell, to avoid confusion I'll refer to him here as JC.
I can think of worse photographers to look up to and try to emulate, in fact I can think of few better, and this is a positive. However, sometimes "beginners" - not my words - or as I'll refer to them here, disciples, are best served by speaking less and listening more. Photographers such as JC, and others, have a wealth of knowledge and have formed opinion based on a wealth of experience.

I don't doubt that given the opportunity he's been given, together with his passion and enthusiasm, Fred will go on to greater things and in time also have a wealth of knowledge and experience to share. I wish him luck.

 
I kind of agree with you Keith. I am in a strange position at this time where my experience "on my own" is not matured enough and at the same time I'm working like crazy in big productions and get experience faster and faster in the plateau with photographers I admire and respect. It is a big privilege, I am aware of that opportunity. So I can opinate "from a safe place", but at the same time, I do not have the personal maturity and background.

About James Russell, the reason why I often coincide with his views, regardless of the personal apreciation I have for his work, is that I simply see and experience the same things as he does. But fair to say that I'm in a similar area. If I did not agreed with him, I would express it the same way. But it just results that when he writes something, I can see that the content corresponds to what I also experience in commercial photography with human being involved. That correlation is to me the reference that BC posts are reliable. Of course, he is not the only one, there are many experienced photographers here, and so many different needs. I feel probably close to James because of the area involved and also as I pointed several times, because when he shoots humans, they still look humans and not robots. And in fashion it is so easy to "overdo".
I see a lot of those over processed pics in the "recent pro works" section.
The other reason, and this is to me important, is that James embrassed the video lenguage. Many of his posts have been really usefull in the movie section for example.
So yes, to me, James is an healphy influence, exactly like the masters I'm working with at the moment but on the internet. Of course, I have recognized several other masters in this forum too that inspire me.
You are also one to me Keith. I've been a fan of your work from the beginning. This is a totally different approach from commercial photography, but I come from painting and can really apreciate the quality involved in your photographic images (and I know that internet never deserves the real printing quality).

Thanks for the encouragement.

Cheers.


« Last Edit: March 30, 2011, 09:32:45 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #83 on: October 09, 2010, 09:56:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Perhaps we should all take a step back and take note of the title of this thread and read it as it is?

I wonder how many of the critiques here would dare to post any of their images larger than 658p or 15" prints with no post processing? I mean I'm sure there are a few but only a few...

----

/the Aptus-II 12 snapper


Oh, you're still here ? Wink

As for the images posted in the original post, thanks for those, gives me an impression of what the capabilities of the A12 could be like.
As for post processing - personally, I don't care what the raw file or processed 16bit looks like, as long it is sharp, detailed, and as free of issues as possible .
Just as I regarded film.

Fritzer,

There are different needs for different users.

My point entirely.
That's why labeling an 80MP digital back a gadget, and to ramble about MP-race and such nonsense, is ignorant at best.

Contrary to popular belief, photographers who spend 30k or so on a product like this, usually know very well what they are doing and why.


Quote
But the fact is I assist on a daily basis 2 star photographers and that means, huge production, international top models, big team, big brands etc...so I'm pretty much aware of what the workflow means beleive me and if you want to know who are they, I will be pleased to send you a personal message.

You are in a good place then.

Quote
When I write things here (with my more than unperfect english I admit), it is not to criticize for criticizing. But I'm asking myself the same question about who's who, and who's advices are coming from a deep understanding of what the real work is, at least in the commercial photography and specially fashion (the area that I know), because it seems that we don't see the same things.

Your English is at least as good as mine . Wink
As for advice - there is no magic bullet.
And without experience, it's difficult to fully understand what seasoned pros like some of the posters here are sharing .
I know this sounds arrogant, but there you go .


Quote
Also the gearmania, yes this forum is extremely usefull. Probably the best place to be on the internet for tech and gear. This is indeed a very powerfull exchange tool. But I never heard any real artist being obsess with gear, never in my all life. I was talking about when things reach the obsession, and I thing it happens quite a lot over the internet. Not of course about the healphy interest to talk and share about gear techs and specs.

What I think is, the only people obsessed with certain gear are the ones who have no idea what it is made for, let alone are using it .
Every time I read the phrase 'it's the artist, not the gear, stupid' , I know there is nothing to learn from the person writing this.

The gear discussion you read about here, it's just the tip of the iceberg - and it's got bugger all to do with creativity , that's a whole different topic.
Tether, no tether, it's not a matter worth discussing; horses for courses.
Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2806


WWW
« Reply #84 on: October 09, 2010, 11:51:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I somewhat agree, though every thread doesn't have to turn into, or be limited to a sales pitch either. 
[...]
Then again maybe not, maybe it should just be about new lenses and digital backs, though at this stage I think most participants know what dealers sell what brands, what brands "provide a distinctive look".

Personally, I'm not sure that any one brand provides as a clear distinctive look as some might assert.

:-(

If you look at my list half the items would not favor the purchase a MF system (though to be fair half would). The point of the list is that you buy gear in photography for specific reasons.

Distinctive look could apply as much (in fact even more) to a Holga with cross processing as it could to any brand I use.
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #85 on: October 09, 2010, 01:15:19 PM »
ReplyReply

What I think is, the only people obsessed with certain gear are the ones who have no idea what it is made for, let alone are using it  ...

...horses for courses.
I think some here think I am obsessed with "certain gear", but the courses for which I want horses include old stone architecture and landscapes, and I want grass not to look like a billiard table, stonework not to look like toffee, and skin not to look like plastic.
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3651


« Reply #86 on: October 09, 2010, 01:37:27 PM »
ReplyReply

I think some here think I am obsessed with "certain gear", but the courses for which I want horses include old stone architecture and landscapes, and I want grass not to look like a billiard table, stonework not to look like toffee, and skin not to look like plastic.

Hi Dick,

Can also be achieved by using a longer focal length and stitching more tiles ..., it also allows to adjust focus to the tile in question, and thus achieve focusstacking. Of course stationary subjects are easiest with such an approach.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #87 on: October 09, 2010, 01:42:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the encouragement.

...and for your kind comments.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #88 on: October 09, 2010, 01:48:19 PM »
ReplyReply

I think some here think I am obsessed with "certain gear", but the courses for which I want horses include old stone architecture and landscapes, and I want grass not to look like a billiard table, stonework not to look like toffee, and skin not to look like plastic.



Dick, you already held the answer in your hand: film.

I'm not joking. I have been struggling with a project of my own - the planning stage, trying to find co-operation (much as one often did with fashion and calendar travel) and the fact is that most of the subject matter is going to be more or less exactly what you specify, with the addition of water. I am seriously thinking of using my venerable Nikon F3 or a rangefinder instead of the two digitals I have, D200 and D700. Why? I have never been convinced that the beautiful colours that digi gives me are also giving the detail I think is there. I base that opinion of the way I see my own A3+ material, most of it from Kodachrome, and I don't know that digi outperforms it; yes, Kodachrome's just a song now, I know.

Rob C
Logged

Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #89 on: October 09, 2010, 01:58:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Dick,

Can also be achieved by using a longer focal length and stitching more tiles ..., it also allows to adjust focus to the tile in question, and thus achieve focusstacking. Of course stationary subjects are easiest with such an approach.

Cheers,
Bart
Yes, Horses for courses...
I have chosen Apo-Digitars with large image circles for shift-and-stitch, and I have a 300mm I intend to use on a Clauss... so, when I do want lots of pixels, I will have options.

...then, to photograph a train at speed, I am toying with the idea of using 2 P3's, 2 Hassy digibacks, 2 eShutters, a matched pair of Apo-Digitars and a pocket Wizard system to sync them.

This would, of course be a relatively flat subject for which Virtual viewpoint should work well, especially if most of the background was steam!
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #90 on: October 09, 2010, 02:07:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Dick, you already held the answer in your hand: film.

I yes, Kodachrome's just a song now, I know.

Rob C
Hi, Rob...

I really appreciate the advantages of digi, but I appreciate that for hi-res large landscapes including moving trains, waves, boats etc., sheet film can be an asset, but (back on topic) 60 or 80 Mpx backs allow you to print quite large at high res without having to stitch.

Film is ideal for stone buildings and beach scenes, as long as the grain is only evident where you want to see grains of sand! (but Kodachrome was grain-free).
« Last Edit: October 09, 2010, 02:09:33 PM by Dick Roadnight » Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
JSK
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34



« Reply #91 on: October 09, 2010, 03:09:59 PM »
ReplyReply



I believe if there was a 31mpx option closer to the price of the Canon he'd buy it, or if the used market was more friendly in regards to repairs and dealer/maker support he'd probably go that direction.

BC


thats the area Pentax should have covered instead they are (without digital MF customer base) going against Phase Leaf Hasselblad
and with similar prices.. not to mention their presence as far as renting availability replacements troubleshooting experience etc.. sure
I can support their effort and nostalgia aside but who are they kidding?
Logged

⨀ LEICA ⨀ PHASE 1 ⨀ HASSELBLAD ⨀ MAMIYA ⨀ NIKON ⨀ CANON ⨀ PROFOTO ⨀ BRONCOLOR ⨀ ARRI ⨀ BRIESE ⨀
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #92 on: October 09, 2010, 03:33:25 PM »
ReplyReply

  Re: >61MP image files for peepers
Reply #91 on: Today at 10:35:02 AM Reply Quote 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote from: Fritzer on Today at 09:56:48 AM
"Every time I read the phrase 'it's the artist, not the gear, stupid' , I know there is nothing to learn from the person writing this."



Quote from: Fred
"I completly agree with that. Repeating over and over again "gear does not matters, it is the artist" is the same as the opposite "gear is all". I never beleived that statement in a way or another.
IMO, gear should respond, embrasse, suits a particular artist's approach and style of working."



Well, take another look at the Peter Lindbergh site and run through the movie clips. If anyone still agrees with the first quotation, they haven't been paying attention to what they've been seeing.

The truth is, he (Lindbergh) could be working with any similar camera, but he happens to be a Nikonista; but the point is, the shoot is all his and his girls' work, not the equipment that is the star.

Rob C


 
Logged

Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #93 on: October 09, 2010, 04:00:33 PM »
ReplyReply

IMO, gear should respond, embrasse, suits a particular artist's approach and style of working.
So, yes it is important. It is even important to know the gear that don't fit with one's needs.

Rhight. And as long as existing gear fits the needs of certain fotografers, that gear is spot-on .

Quote
The thing is that internet is full of tech addicts and commercial vendors and maybe, the cultural bombing about megapixels have been doing damages for the very beginning of digital tools.

Yo have the attitude of a DPR-forum laymann - MPs in the professional world are the 3rd coming - the 2nd one being larger sensors.

Quote
But the competition is tough. In short, dslr have improoved incredibly while MF makers have choosen the path of heavier and bigger artillery, basically. I'm not sure this is the correct path, but I don't have a cristal ball and wish they know their clients and targets enough.


MFDB is bigger, heavier, and delivers better quality. For those who know their cameras - MFDB systems have beome smaller and faster in the digital erea.

 DSLRs have gone nowhere really, with the 5DII being the only exception.
All other top models in DSLR are overprized; you can't get any compact FF non-DSLR at an affordable prize, and APS-C models have everything geared toward the amateur market, what with the lack of a finder, and even swiveling displays limited to vertical (movie) shooting at times .
« Last Edit: October 09, 2010, 04:02:11 PM by Fritzer » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7427


WWW
« Reply #94 on: October 10, 2010, 03:30:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I got the impression the Pentax 645D is selling well in Japan. The Pentax 645 was a well respected MF camera and the Pentax 67 was a classic. Also, it is my understanding that the 645D has pretty decent AF, much better than usual in MF. So I wouldn't count out Pentax.

Also, I'd say that the direct competitor to Pentax 645D is the Leica S2, and in that comparison the Pentax is almost free.

I cannot see that an MF camera would be possible at DSLR prices at least not with interchangeable components. I own a Pentax 67 myself and it was really cheap at the time I bought it. My guess is that development cost has been depreciated long ago and the construction is quite simple. A modular camera will always be more expensive.

Whether the Pentax 645D will be success or failure the market only can decide.

Best regards
Erik


thats the area Pentax should have covered instead they are (without digital MF customer base) going against Phase Leaf Hasselblad
and with similar prices.. not to mention their presence as far as renting availability replacements troubleshooting experience etc.. sure
I can support their effort and nostalgia aside but who are they kidding?

Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #95 on: October 10, 2010, 03:38:14 AM »
ReplyReply

The Pentax 645 was a well respected MF camera and the Pentax 67 was a classic. Also, it is my understanding that the 645D has pretty decent AF, much better than usual in MF. So I wouldn't count out Pentax.
Best regards
Erik
[/quote


Yes, Eric, and so did I own a Pentax 67 II; and we both know the problems that baby gives with vibration from that two-ton shutter!

So it, along with most of the other MF cameras I tried, was as flawed as a three-wheeled car (which I have also owned, to my shame).

Hardly something that deserves the term classic, though that's indeed how the common history is rewritten, not only here but almost anywhere that people chew the fat and reminisce...

Rob C
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7427


WWW
« Reply #96 on: October 10, 2010, 12:55:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I sorted out the vibration issues on the Pentax by switching from Manfrotto 055 to Velbon Sherpa Pro. With film and a decent tripod the Pentax 67 was much better than 135. A friend of mine had a Hasselblad and I think that it could be that his images were a bit sharper than mine, I don't know. But I would say that he Pentax 67 definitively was OK once you learned to live with it.

Best regards
Erik


The Pentax 645 was a well respected MF camera and the Pentax 67 was a classic. Also, it is my understanding that the 645D has pretty decent AF, much better than usual in MF. So I wouldn't count out Pentax.
Best regards
Erik
[/quote


Yes, Eric, and so did I own a Pentax 67 II; and we both know the problems that baby gives with vibration from that two-ton shutter!

So it, along with most of the other MF cameras I tried, was as flawed as a three-wheeled car (which I have also owned, to my shame).

Hardly something that deserves the term classic, though that's indeed how the common history is rewritten, not only here but almost anywhere that people chew the fat and reminisce...

Rob C
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #97 on: October 10, 2010, 03:09:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Eric

Mine lived on a Gitzo G410, G1371 head, a combination almost heavier and tougher than which I could lift!

I've just watched a rerun of a DVD that a friend sent me some time ago; it's about James Ravilious, a photographer of English rural life. He used an M3 and old lenses that were not coated. The work is beautiful... we have lost a hell of a lot along the way, mainly, I think, the power to see beauty in what might be thought ugly; but perhaps most seriously of all, the purity of black and white photographic tonality.

Rob C

Logged

Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad