Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: About Michael's Phlog  (Read 15859 times)

michael

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5084
About Michael's Phlog
« on: August 25, 2014, 06:39:32 AM »

This Forum is for discussion of Michael's Phlog, a new feature that has been added to The Luminous Endowment for Photographer's web site.

Michaels Phlog will regularly feature a new image or two taken by Michael, and then analysed by Michael, with discussions about the locations and situation as well as shooting technique used, and post processing.

Each Image has its own topic and readers should feel free to discuss the images.

Why is it called a "Phlog"? Well, though a strange word, it simply means a Photographic Blog. By the way, what does the "B" in "Blog" stand for?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2014, 09:42:42 AM by michael »
Logged

Tavira Guy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2014, 09:03:19 AM »

Brilliant idea, Michael.  Look forward to many discussions.
Logged

Todd Suttles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
  • Hi !
    • Todd Suttles Photography
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #2 on: August 25, 2014, 09:57:47 AM »

Thank You for Luminous Landscape -and now sharing your own work. Appreciative, -t
Logged
I love this place! Thanks to everyone who participates; what a gift.

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #4 on: August 25, 2014, 11:07:55 AM »

Thank you for your generosity.
Logged

michael

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5084
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2014, 11:17:41 AM »

So then Phlog makes perfect sense.

M
Logged

gdanmitchell

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 70
    • http://www.gdanmitchell.com/
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2014, 02:20:19 PM »

Darn, I see that someone beat me to it with the answer to the "b in blog" question yes, the original term for what we now know as a blog (funny word!) was "web log" or "weblog."

I was lucky enough to stumble onto the web in 1994 and within months to find out that I could run a desktop server in my faculty office using an early program called MacHTTP. I had a server up within months of discovering Netscape, and I then learned HTML by looking a page source, trying stuff, and figuring out how to not break things too badly.

Within a few years of this time I started following Dave Winer's "Scripting News" web site, which was arguably the first (and certainly one of the first) weblogs. In fact, I think he may have coined the term in the late 1990s. Until that time, web publishing was often modeled on paper publishing much more than it is today, with the predominant web sites typically repositioning material that would otherwise be printed on paper and then adding links. Winer began to share daily brief updates on his Scripting News site, and the idea began to take root. Early on he was an important mover and shaker, generating a lot of important conversations about writing for the web, creating important software (Frontier/Manila through is Userland company), developing RSS, and generally getting lots of others on the bandwagon.

In those days I moved from MacHTTP to the Userland software very quickly, and I was blogging ("weblogging?") by the late 1990s, and that has been my orientation to the web since then, for everything from my online teaching resources to my photography web sites. For something like a decade I have also been doing a sort of "real time" journaling of my photography, continuously posting daily new photographs with commentary.

I like your new "phlogx" (aka "photoblog") idea a lot. If nothing else, generating a flow of photographs worthy of sharing daily, even if only for purposes of commentary and discussion, is a valuable discipline and can be very interesting for readers.

Dan
« Last Edit: August 26, 2014, 06:28:53 PM by gdanmitchell »
Logged
G Dan Mitchell
SF Bay Area, California, USA

alifatemi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 242
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #8 on: August 26, 2014, 10:42:56 AM »

Michael, this phlog of you is an excellent idea; I read your technics of each picture and it is like a review of what I knew already and also learn new things, one of them that you got your new Pentax! Thanks indeed.
Logged
Ali

gdanmitchell

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 70
    • http://www.gdanmitchell.com/
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #9 on: August 26, 2014, 06:28:05 PM »

I like your use of flowery language

Dang spell "checker!" (I'll see if I can edit and fix that in the original.)

On the positive side, phlox is much preferable to "pox." ;-)

Dan
« Last Edit: August 26, 2014, 06:29:38 PM by gdanmitchell »
Logged
G Dan Mitchell
SF Bay Area, California, USA

ripgriffith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 360
    • ripsart.com
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #10 on: August 27, 2014, 06:35:07 AM »

I like your use of flowery language
that's a rather punctilious remark   ::)
Logged

Robert-Peter Westphal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 366
    • Nature-Photography Westphal
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #11 on: August 31, 2014, 05:00:51 AM »

Hallo,

To me the idea of the Phlog is absolutely great !
But as I was going through the images and the description of the images I stopped short and was thinking ' haven't I've seen a film shortly in which Michael hold a speech on mirror less cameras, hasn't he accused Nikon and Canon for not producing such type of camera, hasn't he told that he sold his Nikon gear due to it's weight and size', and then suddenly he presents current images all ( or nearly all ) shot with a medium format camera, big and heavy sized, at least compared to the Sony A7r which he prefers.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but to me it looks like praying water and drinking wine.

Nevertheless, the Phlog itself is a great idea and should not suffer of my words, which represent just a small thought which came up when going through the images, which I really like.

Robert
« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 07:18:57 AM by Robert-Peter Westphal »
Logged
'visit my completly renewed gallery at http://www.naturfotografie-westphal.com '

michael

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5084
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #12 on: August 31, 2014, 08:11:16 AM »

It's about embracing both ends of the spectrum. If I'm working from the car, using a large and heavy tripod and head, then a large camera and lenses is not an issue. For my landscape and nature work an MF camera is perfect.

But for documentary and street photography one of the mirrorless cameras is a preferable solution.

Horses for courses.

Michael
Logged

Robert-Peter Westphal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 366
    • Nature-Photography Westphal
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #13 on: August 31, 2014, 08:18:19 AM »

Hallo Michael,

Thanks for your fast answer and to clarify this topic which makes absolutely sense !

Unfortunately this is nearly exactly the opposite of the context of the video you published !

Best wishes

Robert
Logged
'visit my completly renewed gallery at http://www.naturfotografie-westphal.com '

HSway

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 79
    • Sunwaysite
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #14 on: September 03, 2014, 12:36:06 PM »

Hallo Michael,

Thanks for your fast answer and to clarify this topic which makes absolutely sense !

Unfortunately this is nearly exactly the opposite of the context of the video you published !

Best wishes

Robert

Hi Robert, I don't get that impression. High picture quality exclusive to the large DSLR is becoming available in smaller mirrorless bodies, even in 135 format, which is bringing new options for replacing the heavier and bulkier kit for more portable and compact one (and possibly a different user experience/possibilities which can have other implications). OTOH, the dedicated use of the MF isn't in this respect really affected by these changes or development as there is no A7 of this format (one would put in a small shoulder bag) and so is its place wherever required or preferred.

Another question (another one) can be personal views of the recent correlation between the current level of DSLR picture quality and MF - looking pretty much from similar perspective. Similar though not quite the same as these are two different formats. But also not as much different because of the overall level in IQ we have come to with the 135 format DSLR and lenses in general (say, in absolute terms). So a mature, specific system like Nikon or Canon can have a lot of appeal (more compact, less expensive and so on) looking from this side.
Though again this is affected by some potential or real changes because the same is roughly becoming available in even more compact Sony package. And throwing another colour to the palette the MF is getting less expensive.
So as expected there is a whole range of possible views, weight/bulk considerations/ system specific preferences, ways, styles etc. etc. But some possibilities change and the trends shift with them. A MF user will typically see things differently than a DSLR user, though the options change for both not mentioning that there are not only the 'typical users' for each case.

The video focuses on the first instance (paragraph) of my post. As the compact tools are giving better results than they did before they get more use than before (becoming the preferred choice more often). And it of course also touches on some related topics there.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 12:38:31 PM by HSway »
Logged

Fine_Art

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1172
Re: About Michael's Phlog
« Reply #15 on: October 29, 2014, 01:31:37 AM »

I just found these articles from the link at the home page. These are really enjoyable to read! Great work.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up