James,
As a starting photographer I always find it a relief to hear a pro say: no client cares about pixel count. It's just too much of an investment to buy a top of the line MFDB for me.
I wonder, do clients care about the aspect ratio? Everyone and their mother knows 3:4 fits a magazine better (full-page of course) than 2:3.
Are there ever any problems? How do you deal with cropping the image in lay-out?
Do you take it into account when shooting?
thanks,
Mike
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=205647\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's very difficult to answer this on a web based forum, especialy one that is so technically driven.
Any electronic conversation seems to come across as stone cold facts and in art there really is no hard and fast rules.
Of course we shoot to the highest resolution possible, that is just a given. Today I'm not going to shoot any major campaign with a 6mpx camera, but today there are few 6mpx cameras anyway.
Previously most photographers had a few formats, from 8x10 to 35mm and used them either for effect, style, or resolution and though those purchases were high they really were 10 year investments.
Digital has changed this and now digital cameras are considered by most very expensive and constantly changing.
I completely believe that 90% of the comparisions people continually make between dslrs and medium format are cost driven. If a Canon 1ds3 was $44,000 I don't think many people would compare it to a medium format back, or if medium format was $6,000 I think it would all be a non issue.
What keeps people talking is the upping of the pixel count. You see it today that Hasseblad has announced a 50mpx camera. I'm sure every maker will follow suit.
Now does that mean that my 18mpx P21 is now worthless? No, but it does make you wonder if you should go forward or just hold on.
The reason I showed those images was to illustrate that when it gets to the eyes of a client or a potential client they are looking for the photograph, not usually the stitching detail, or the resolution, though once you shoot a campaign, they may be looking very close at "their" photograph.
My suggestion to anyone is to put as much resource and effort in front of the lens as you do in the back of lens. It's a difficult balance of where you place your investment, regardless of the level your work at.
To be honest, on an open forum, it's much easier (and safer) to talk about technique than how I or anyone personally views or approachs this industry, because one comment taken out of context can be damaging.
As far as the aspect ration, digital or more importantly the computer screen has changed that also.
Obviously a 8 1/2 x 11 (or close to that) print ratio is not going to disappear, but most of us see more layouts in horizontal than ever before. I assume it's because the AD's and designers are working on a horizontal pallete and it's just is more impressive to fill the screen. Or it could be that imagery is now purposed over for so many different forms of media, from outdoor, to computer, to print media, print collateral.
So to answer you question about formats, use what you are comfortable with and will be accepted by your clients.
Personally I haven't found one camera, one lens that will do everything I'm required to do but that was the same with film.
JR