MFD had better get busy then...
It's difficult to tell in these short articles what was said, what was left out, though the quotes were brief, maybe on target . . . well almost on target.
If these companies really believe their main market is photography for commerce, then they somewhat glossed over the real reason any professional photographer shoots digital . . .
because you can see the image, the client can see the image and everyone goes home secure.
I'm not bashing medium format but it's somewhat ironic that seeing the image is so important, though as of today, all medium format backs have challenged lcds, or require a computer to get a decent preview.
Now when it comes to tethering, I've never met a photographer that "loves" tethering, anymore than I've met a DP, or good director that loves the video tap for cinema cameras. It is just another level of complexity, limited mobility that gets in the way of making a photograph.
It is sometimes necessary, sometimes mandatory, but I've shot few sessions in the digital segment of my career, where at some point I didn't have to unplug to get the image I wanted. In fact 99.9% of the best imagery I've produced have always come from an untethered camera, which is ironic because medium format prides itself on "superior" image quality though on the other hand makes it very difficult to tell if the photographer actually captured the "superior" image.
I really would have thought that the very first thing a specialty camera maker would have put resource to would be the preview.
Imagine a Hasselblad with a whopping 5" screen and a wi-fi to a device like an Ipod touch. Imagine if you could hand out ten ipod touches around the room and just shoot
knowing people could look or not look, zoom in or not zoom in, but the photographer would be free to actually move more than 15' from the camera.
Imagine a 6 figure shoot without a digital tech.
Also left out in that article was any mention of time investment. Professional photographers that know there way around the digital process are just completely overburdened with time demands. I know zero photographers that go to bed each night (make that each morning) knowing they
completed all of their tasks for the day, even 1/2 of that.
I know at the end of every still photography shoot day I'm looking at 1 to 2 days of post production before we even get to final selects. No photographer ever dreamed they would become their own lab, pre press house and proofer, much less web site/gallery builder and html expert.
The software of these cameras needs to be easier, not just faster, easier, because I've done the test of moving 42 sliders back and forth trying to get to final and at the end of the day, it's 50% more time effective just to produce a properly exposed image, then send it to photoshop and do the color and tone corrections there.
Again, I'm amazed that Iphone Apps are outpacing, out offering what is available in professional software suites and do it with a few clicks.
The other thing this medium format article did not touch on is higher iso. Shooting low light, continuous light, available light with some slight modifiers has opened up a whole new world of photography and I and others have expanded our repertoire with incorporating found light along with simple modifiers in ways we could never do with film.
I've shot with the illumination of window lights in soho, light from a juke box in Dallas, I even used a TV screen as a key light in Miami and medium format just doesn't like to go that direction. Sometimes you can shoot low light with medium format but you usually are locked down on a tripod saying, hold it , don't move, God don't move.
The last thing I have to say about this article is nobody mentioned motion capture. (I hate the term video, cause video sounds cheap).
Still photography is not dead, but motion is with us and won't go away, actually it allows us to offer more, create more, do more than we could ever dream possible just a few years ago and the ability to offer a client motion imagery, even if they don't ask for it makes them happy and making a client happy is the goal. That's doesn't mean we all have to be roll over queens, though giving more than expected keeps you working, regardless of the economy.
I find it interesting that Phase looks at Hasselblad, Hasselblad looks at Canon/Nikon but no one has actually asked us what we need tomorrow, not today. I've talked to different makers, mentioned lenses, lcd's etc. but in the end the camera we need doesn't exist because the work we will be producing in a year or two hasn't been dreamed up yet.
There is all this talk about the cost of medium format cameras and for what they do some of it seems absurd, but before anybody makes anything new, sends out another pdf roadmap press release, I suggest they climb on board and go through a photographers production from start to finish.
$40,000 for a camera, I''ll write that check in an instant if and this is a big if, the camera doesn't stop me from shooting anything I desire, in fact the camera can do so much I have to dream up new ways to use it at it's fullest.
I'd love to see a non mirror box camera, with a big lcd, wifi previews to hand held devices, tether easy to larger computers, iso that is really moveable, not somewhat moveable and most of all real full frame, high def raw motion capture that is beyond the dslr offerings.
I want a camera to rock my world, to make my work better, my life easier, my clients go holy shit that's amazing.
I want in camera processing like iphone apps that give me the look I want out of the camera for galleries and previews so at the end of the day, all I have to do is drag 1000 images to the web for review.
I want these things to last more than 12 months. I don't mind buying new lenses, buying new accessories, but I'm tired of looking at almost brand new cameras sitting on a shelf because the lcd doesn't give a proper preview, or the iso just won't go past slow film without a month of post work.
Most of all I want these camera companies to stop looking at each other for answers and look at me and other photographers.
I don't want to hear about megapixels cause megapixels is so 2009. I want to hear about what will work for 2012.
I want the camera makers to talk to a client that doesn't hope for good work, but demands great work.
When I read an article that addresses this I'll then write a new check for equipment.
The thing I really want when I read these articles is for the makers to stop talking about each other and talk about what they are going to offer, better yet, what they offer today.
Phase needs to forget about Hasselblad, Hasselblad needs to drop the talk about Leica, Leica just needs to get on with it and deliver product.
JR
