Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: bcooter on December 30, 2009, 12:57:24 pm
-
IMO
With this in mind I find it completely amazing that for a week or so, there were begs, suggestions and pleas to Michael for this section to become the sole domain of medium format "users". Mostly to stop the comments of anyone that uses use a "35mm camera" and has an opinion, post a result or worse even a comparison.
So we got a name change and look at the result.
Now the forum has returned to normal, which means it has become the domain of the medium format sales people. At last count I totaled 5 ( Plus Reps), From Columbia, England, New York, Miami and of course Atlanta and we've got vague and not so vague comments from dealers regarding the validity of a test, comparing two medium format cameras, reprocessing of the files and more posting of mediocre photographs than the cover of a London tabloid with a dig or two thrown in at the dslr 35mm set.
(BTW: Just a suggestion to anyone that sells cameras. Please post a pretty photograph. Sometimes I think it is the goal of every medium format camera dealer in the world to shoot alley's, skies, grey rainy days, street bums, Grade C models with amateur makeup and hair, fruit and of course the obligatory color chart, just to prove that their $40,000 camera system can show detail even in an ugly photograph.)
Point is this or any section of any forum is never just about that one single title and never will be.
I do respect Michael and his decision to do whatever he wants with his forum, but lately we've seen a exodus of people who actually make a living working with high end cameras and equipment and other than stopping the dslr talk (to some extent) this forum still mentions post processing, storage devices, tripods, lighting pc vs. mac and of course the constant medium format sales message.
Gosh, they've even run off the photographer who was instrumental in designing the Sinar Artech camera because he showed how close the new Canon tilt shifts were to medium format quality. That had to send a cold chill up the tripod carrying medium format guys, because the mirror up tripod crowd seems to be the last real domain of the expert pixel peepers.
I'd love to see a rename of this section, but not one based on format, just based on high end cameras. I don't care if someone is an amateur or professional as long as they are working at the highest level their talents and pocketbooks allow.
In fact call it "money talks" because the price of the previous generation medium format back has fallen to around the price of the last generation high end dslr, or name it "any camera that cost more than $5,000".
I think this would bring healthy debate, an exchange of knowledge and of course there will be the brand worshipers, the format pixel peepers and the sales messages to kill the buzz, but at least it won't be exclusionary.
This opens up discussion of how to make the leap from still to video and back, what system is "actually best" for a certain project and how all of these cameras work in real world conditions.
How about keeping the forum open to imagination, like MT's plunger cam, or some guy that does mount a boris tilt shift on a Canon 5d2, or how about a plunger cam video? . . . anything that is not just the normal, constant talk about pixels.
If not just let it run at whatever it's called today and let Phase and Hasselblad dealers beat themselves into oblivion selling to the last 6 landscape photographers trying to desperately prove that their system really is better than the other guys.
Or let the topics range from comparing 8x10 film to a medium format back, or asking about the Hy6 prism. I hate to bring this up but 8x10 film cameras and hy6 prism's are somewhat dead end systems. You may like them, but give it another week and you'll see both on the Antique Roadshow.
The funny thing about all of this is the medium format sales people come on here to move product, but if they throw everyone but a medium format back owner out the door, who they gonna sell to? Maybe each other, cause they all seem to eventually become absorbed or work for the "competition".
Now that I think of it, maybe it's best to just let nature and Darwin run it's course.
IMO
BC
-
Well, I am no pro, but I do own a >$5000 system, so take my opinion as just that.
I disagree. I don't think that there are signs that anyone has left, apart from James Russell who left when one too many posters complained in the "Recent Professional Works" thread that he was posting 35mm results (sadly, since his posts bothered very few people, given the caliber of his work). I am guessing that Rainer, like many others here, is just taking time off for the holidays. These threads get stressful from time to time, but people usually return after a break, no?
In Rainer's poll thread, I saw a consensus that 35mm has perhaps become a little too common (it drowns out the MF stuff pretty quickly), but that almost no one wanted to see it leave completely. In that sense, when you and gwhitf want to post your comments about 35mm carrying your business, everyone will be reading it as usual. After the previous name change, there was a small boost in the 35mm chatter, since many 35mm FF users consider their cameras to have "large sensors", I guess, but after this change, it will hopefully revert to the previous levels, i.e. it will be mostly about MF and larger, with the occasional comparisons to 35mm and comparisons between lenses of different formats. I personally consider this the best combination of healthy and useful.
Just because a few pros (or even many pros) are using 35mm predominantly is not a good reason to let the 35mm drown out other talk here; this forum was never a pro forum as such, although many pros hang out here, but rather an MF forum. There are other forums for 35mm and for pro talk. Maybe Michael can even add a pro forum here, in case some pros prefer that format, but I think that would run the risk of splitting the forum into two, and thus making it only 1/4 as interesting (as does every other change, including this and the previous name changes).
-
IMO
With this in mind I find it completely amazing that for a week or so, there were begs, suggestions and pleas to Michael for this section to become the sole domain of medium format "users". Mostly to stop the comments of anyone that uses use a "35mm camera" and has an opinion, post a result or worse even a comparison.
So we got a name change and look at the result.
Now the forum has returned to normal, which means it has become the domain of the medium format sales people. At last count I totaled 5 ( Plus Reps), From Columbia, England, New York, Miami and of course Atlanta and we've got vague and not so vague comments from dealers regarding the validity of a test, comparing two medium format cameras, reprocessing of the files and more posting of mediocre photographs than the cover of a London tabloid with a dig or two thrown in at the dslr 35mm set.
(BTW: Just a suggestion to anyone that sells cameras. Please post a pretty photograph. Sometimes I think it is the goal of every medium format camera dealer in the world to shoot alley's, skies, grey rainy days, street bums, Grade C models with amateur makeup and hair, fruit and of course the obligatory color chart, just to prove that their $40,000 camera system can show detail even in an ugly photograph.)
Point is this or any section of any forum is never just about that one single title and never will be.
I do respect Michael and his decision to do whatever he wants with his forum, but lately we've seen a exodus of people who actually make a living working with high end cameras and equipment and other than stopping the dslr talk (to some extent) this forum still mentions post processing, storage devices, tripods, lighting pc vs. mac and of course the constant medium format sales message.
Gosh, they've even run off the photographer who was instrumental in designing the Sinar Artech camera because he showed how close the new Canon tilt shifts were to medium format quality. That had to send a cold chill up the tripod carrying medium format guys, because the mirror up tripod crowd seems to be the last real domain of the expert pixel peepers.
I'd love to see a rename of this section, but not one based on format, just based on high end cameras. I don't care if someone is an amateur or professional as long as they are working at the highest level their talents and pocketbooks allow.
In fact call it "money talks" because the price of the previous generation medium format back has fallen to around the price of the last generation high end dslr, or name it "any camera that cost more than $5,000".
I think this would bring healthy debate, an exchange of knowledge and of course there will be the brand worshipers, the format pixel peepers and the sales messages to kill the buzz, but at least it won't be exclusionary.
This opens up discussion of how to make the leap from still to video and back, what system is "actually best" for a certain project and how all of these cameras work in real world conditions.
How about keeping the forum open to imagination, like MT's plunger cam, or some guy that does mount a boris tilt shift on a Canon 5d2, or how about a plunger cam video? . . . anything that is not just the normal, constant talk about pixels.
If not just let it run at whatever it's called today and let Phase and Hasselblad dealers beat themselves into oblivion selling to the last 6 landscape photographers trying to desperately prove that their system really is better than the other guys.
Or let the topics range from comparing 8x10 film to a medium format back, or asking about the Hy6 prism. I hate to bring this up but 8x10 film cameras and hy6 prism's are somewhat dead end systems. You may like them, but give it another week and you'll see both on the Antique Roadshow.
The funny thing about all of this is the medium format sales people come on here to move product, but if they throw everyone but a medium format back owner out the door, who they gonna sell to? Maybe each other, cause they all seem to eventually become absorbed or work for the "competition".
Now that I think of it, maybe it's best to just let nature and Darwin run it's course.
IMO
BC
I agree with a lot of this, especially the ugly tests that we do. That is one of the improvements I would like to see from our company in 2010. Let's shoot a test with an image that actually moves people, or at the least, provokes a positive reaction about the image itself.
I also agree with Klaban about the problem that didn't exist and for the record I have never had a problem with the path these threads on this forum have taken, whether 35mm gets mixed in with mf, etc. I don't see where any dealer or rep has made any comment regarding what the title or subject matter of these threads should be. We're not the ones throwing anyone out the door.
The thing I've always liked about LL is that it has been a mix of pros, amateurs, fashion, landscape, architecture, amazing photographers, super amazing photographers, all with opinions, all discussing equipment and images and photography (could probably be more photography discussions, but no one is stopping anyone from that, last I checked).
The best thing is Michael has largely let it police itself and I think most participants have done that pretty well. Sometimes dealers seem more present than at other times, and it feels like a bit of a marketplace, but I feel this is kept mostly in check (except for those darn tests). But if our participation or any of our input is not valued, anyone can certainly tell us to go away.
Steve Hendrix
-
i am not gone, i am not so fast leaving a forum where i have put in so much time, sharing experiences but getting interesting views and opinions as well. but it does not inspire me much, if i get the feeling that i am boring people here because the definition of this forum is only for medium format discussions.
if this forum will run in future ONLY about mf my interest in participating will be very low.
i am interested in in photography as well as in the tools to get done the job. mf is ONE part of this, nothing more.
so its interesting for me to read about red cameras, about computer/ software workflow, programs, about optics and most interesting is to have here a forum in which i meet photographers whose work i respect and with whom i can exchange my experiences.
it wont work to cut out here an edge and to open a new "pro" forum, and my interest and my time to jump in 5 different forums is too limited. means i wont participate in one computer, one 35mm one red one mf one whatsever pro forum.
i had found all this here and if this forum will become to narrow in terms of the themes which are discussed i will be gone ...
cause i have other things to do than to make sex with pixels.
about the reps:
what bores me most from the dealers is that they do the hell not to talk about the weak points of their systems, which have been in the past so fundamental that it was needless for me even to think to work withsome of these company/ products,- even if it would not have cost one dollar to do it. never the responsible people have had the character to talk opened about this flaws of their products. this might be understandable, but as long it runs that way i am not too much interested on the rep- opinions and claims,- claims which often are factual wrong,- somtimes consciently wrong , sometimes because the sellers dont have the time to go deepenough in the problems , which appear if using this gear professional, even if this are their own products.
there is so much hot air spoken .... its sometimes incredible for me. and this hot air mixed with discreeted facts does not make it too interesting for me to discuss these claims. the way most companies ( and reps ) collect much of their "knowledge" are 100s of opinions of users, but this does not make the things easier cause these opinions have to be weighted in the right way and at this point the problem and the confusion even becomes bigger. this weighting is done too often too wrong .... as it is constantly shown in what is improved in the products and whats not.
so i would not have a problem if all professional ( and non pro as well ...) photographers who have experience with medium format, would be invited to be here in this mf forum, and companies dealers and reps would be invited to make their ( advertisement ) claims in another forum. but i know this is wishfull thinking. what i dont know is whats going on behind the scene which makes it so hopeless even to think in such ......
-
IMO
With this in mind I find it completely amazing that for a week or so, there were begs, suggestions and pleas to Michael for this section to become the sole domain of medium format "users". Mostly to stop the comments of anyone that uses use a "35mm camera" and has an opinion, post a result or worse even a comparison.
So we got a name change and look at the result.
Now the forum has returned to normal, which means it has become the domain of the medium format sales people. At last count I totaled 5 ( Plus Reps), From Columbia, England, New York, Miami and of course Atlanta and we've got vague and not so vague comments from dealers regarding the validity of a test, comparing two medium format cameras, reprocessing of the files and more posting of mediocre photographs than the cover of a London tabloid with a dig or two thrown in at the dslr 35mm set.
(BTW: Just a suggestion to anyone that sells cameras. Please post a pretty photograph. Sometimes I think it is the goal of every medium format camera dealer in the world to shoot alley's, skies, grey rainy days, street bums, Grade C models with amateur makeup and hair, fruit and of course the obligatory color chart, just to prove that their $40,000 camera system can show detail even in an ugly photograph.)
Point is this or any section of any forum is never just about that one single title and never will be.
I do respect Michael and his decision to do whatever he wants with his forum, but lately we've seen a exodus of people who actually make a living working with high end cameras and equipment and other than stopping the dslr talk (to some extent) this forum still mentions post processing, storage devices, tripods, lighting pc vs. mac and of course the constant medium format sales message.
Gosh, they've even run off the photographer who was instrumental in designing the Sinar Artech camera because he showed how close the new Canon tilt shifts were to medium format quality. That had to send a cold chill up the tripod carrying medium format guys, because the mirror up tripod crowd seems to be the last real domain of the expert pixel peepers.
I'd love to see a rename of this section, but not one based on format, just based on high end cameras. I don't care if someone is an amateur or professional as long as they are working at the highest level their talents and pocketbooks allow.
In fact call it "money talks" because the price of the previous generation medium format back has fallen to around the price of the last generation high end dslr, or name it "any camera that cost more than $5,000".
I think this would bring healthy debate, an exchange of knowledge and of course there will be the brand worshipers, the format pixel peepers and the sales messages to kill the buzz, but at least it won't be exclusionary.
This opens up discussion of how to make the leap from still to video and back, what system is "actually best" for a certain project and how all of these cameras work in real world conditions.
How about keeping the forum open to imagination, like MT's plunger cam, or some guy that does mount a boris tilt shift on a Canon 5d2, or how about a plunger cam video? . . . anything that is not just the normal, constant talk about pixels.
If not just let it run at whatever it's called today and let Phase and Hasselblad dealers beat themselves into oblivion selling to the last 6 landscape photographers trying to desperately prove that their system really is better than the other guys.
Or let the topics range from comparing 8x10 film to a medium format back, or asking about the Hy6 prism. I hate to bring this up but 8x10 film cameras and hy6 prism's are somewhat dead end systems. You may like them, but give it another week and you'll see both on the Antique Roadshow.
The funny thing about all of this is the medium format sales people come on here to move product, but if they throw everyone but a medium format back owner out the door, who they gonna sell to? Maybe each other, cause they all seem to eventually become absorbed or work for the "competition".
Now that I think of it, maybe it's best to just let nature and Darwin run it's course.
IMO
BC
Many good points however I think that the current reality is that:
Many pros are/ were busy with end-of-year rush to make a buck, with less time to read/ post
Many pros have given up on trying to squeeze the last buck out of 2009 and have taken off on (hopefully) a nice holiday
Many pros who have made a buck in 2009 are busy shopping 'cause their accountant said they need to offload some cash.
Many dealers/ reps are busy with end-of-year rush to make a buck and as they (we) see these boards as another vehicle, we take the time to post
To be honest I did not notice the name change until it was discussed, after the event...
I test a lot of kit, of all shapes and sizes, for personal "education", for learning the competition, for providing input to the developers and for being able to provide samples to prospects.
I never post images from competing products in public. I am not afraid of confronting and/ or challenging others in public and at times it means bringing up the disadvantages of the other guy...that's life...not always pretty and not always easy either...
There are many different profiles of photographers. Some choose system A over system B or format X over format Y. Some choose to use A and B or A, X and Y.
One thing we all need to be aware of is that there are a lot of photographs being taken "for money" by photographers who do not visit these boards and who represent profiles of what has nothing to do with what we would usually call "pro".
These people/ companies/ institutes buy and use high-end kit and will continue to do so because they need its certain capabilities. These people will often need continuos support from the manufacturer and/ or the dealer and will continue to buy new kit every 2-3 years.
I do agree that often the dealer-user ratio gets bent here but I would not blame the dealers for it. Although it might help if everyone's signature took less than half a page...one line: full or nick name and a website (or just the basic contacts of there's no website)
HNY everyone
Y
-
If MFD digital wants to encourage buyers into its systems it is going to have to use another marketing message besides "better" or even "best" image quality.
That line would have won me over in a heart beat were it not for the prices. The prices caused me to verify and look into these statements from a business point of view and not as an artist.
What is interesting is that it was not the price of MFD that is causing most of us to avoid the system. It is the workflow. What is even more interesting is the constant threads on this subject because of MFD proponents insulting the 35mm user base. If MFD will not insult 35mm but rather embrace them, and then honestly state the difference you will get sales and they will be honest sales... or is that not your intent?
When you set about to prove MFD is a better system, please show us via some other way besides 100% crops because that is not how I sell images. I don't show customers 100% crops to get work. Also please don't tell me the colors look better in print and you can't really tell on a monitor, because the way I get new customers is via them looking at my work on their crappy laptop monitors.
For the record, I know MFD is a better file, I know MFD is a better file, I know MFD is a better file.
-
It seems national wars have been started over less substance than this scuffle, so perhaps the easiest solution is to create an "open" forum, called anything (like "Post No Animal If You Own It, and No Human If You Are Related"?) but "Medium Format/ Film? Digital Backs - and Large Sensor Photography" and allow people like Rainer, James and Mark among other excellent photographers here to post whatever. A fair bit more informational, entertaining, and thought provoking.
IMHO
-
Simply as opinion, I'd say that too tight a category definition makes for boredom, as some have suggested here in this debate already. One of the productive things about loose editing/categorising of content type is the fertility of the ground that opens up. Something that starts up as one thing gets talked through and then develops into a further conversation about something else - all good grist to that mill.
Why would anyone want more restrictions? Isn't life already too full of the damn things? Frankly, the more you hear about something, the more you get to know about it, as long as what you hear is good stuff; that is probably self-governing on this site as enough people know enough to shoot rubbish out of the sky just as soon as it shows itself. On that theme, isn't is odd that people are perfectly willing to contradict, disparage and prove somebody mistaken on matters technical, but come over all bashful when it comes to telling the truth about some truly rotten photographs? Are we all afraid of it becoming our turn next?
Happy New Year
Rob C
-
It was fine before. I don't comprehend why he changed it other than to maybe placate and stop being inundated with whining and complaints from a few very vocal people here.
Part of the problem as well is that the entire industry has apparently hit a wall. For a couple of decades there was something new coming out every year, but this last year or two it's been just minor tweaks to already existing product lines. As such a lot of people haven't really left so much as gone on to do other things for a while rather than posting here(like work extrra hours now that the economy is bad).
-
I have to say that from the time I've started reading the topics in this section (and later on started posting) I learned so many things that I feel a bit in debt to Michael for creating this forum and for all of guys that share their knowledge. I know that if I have a problem with a project or I don't know how to do something and I want to get some info from reliable source, this section is the place to go. And for 35mm matter- recent development of 35mm DSLR is really astounding and it's quality standards have vastly improved over the last few years. I think there are two main reasons why there should be no intervention of admins- first is that many MF users should have a reliable insight on rapidly developing 35mm and it's workflow, because they may find it beneficial for their work. For some, MF may be a worse solution than 35mm and a wider spectrum of threads (some 35mm vs mf comparisons, some info on 35mm lenses etc) may encourage them to try the other format. Second reason is what BC mentioned- if there are no participants that don't own MFDB systems, then what- MF should just circle around the current market users discouraging potential new clients? That's the same thing as stating that we are dinosaurs, doomed and waiting for extinction.
I found Rainer's TSE lenses test and later debate very insightful. "Becoming architecture photographer" topic series was great. There's nothing bad in 5DMK2 / D3X showing up from time to time. Don't kill this forum.
-
I stopped posting several months ago because as addictive as it is was it also caused its share of stress. I felt that my contribution was lost in the countless pages of constant meaningless wars of MFD vs DSLR. I felt that it did not benefit nobody and it was taking time away from me being a productive photog.
I still check LL LF time to time but find it less and less informative or creatively stimulating.
Andre Napier
http://AndreNapier.com (http://AndreNapier.com)
-
It's very easy to filter out this stuff if one finds it disturbing. Counting in all the flame wars, in my case it's still more than worth it. Oh and BCooter makes my day with his contribution to MF vs 35 war
-
At the risk of repeating myself I will say these two things:
Micheal,
1. I believe the forums should be separated by what is in front of the lens (i.e., landscapes, fashion, portraiture, travel, etc. as opposed to by what is behind the lens.) I believe the contributors in the various sections would have more in common then, and perhaps more useful info to share with one another. IMO just because I have a similar camera as the next guy does not mean that we have a lot to share - aside from talking about the cameras themselves...
Doesn't just about every professional have various formats? I think the separation by cameras types is the more gear head/amateur approach. Just my humble opinion.
2. I believe that the vendors here should have VENDOR clearly visible in their profile to the left of the forum entries, so we all know what's what here. It just feels very sketchy not knowing who is selling things and who is not.
-
The funny thing about all of this is the medium format sales people come on here to move product, but if they throw everyone but a medium format back owner out the door, who they gonna sell to? Maybe each other, cause they all seem to eventually become absorbed or work for the "competition".
It is similar to (misguided) efforts to ban short sellers from capital markets ... when the only market participants are long or about to be long, you only get half the story ... short-sellers keep everyone honest.
-
wasn't aware of a problem and still not sure what the actual problem is? so the forum was renamed? again?
this section of the LL forum is pretty much the only corner of the internets i visit to either ask or offer opinion about issues regarding photography and the way i work....over time some details change (which camera, which light, which computer) but the questions remain similar....how to deal with the workflow, what new gadgets, which accessory works best....this is the part of the forum where i can do this....i know that posting specific questions in the computer section won't get the answers i need because the people whose opinions i look for don't have the time to check every section of the forum to see if i had a question...and i don't really look around that much either...this is the place where i can read and relate to stories i am interested in....
dslr vs mf discussions have been a HUGE part of this whole forum for...ever...and as technology advances they won't go anywhere....who knows what cameras we will compare in 2 years? we are all gear heads...
i am all for a PURE mf section, but this one already chooses its own subjects, no matter what you want to name it....so maybe some people have to read over threads they are not interested in or demand another section or maybe they will succeed in driving interesting discussion out of this one.....
i don't offer my opinion about gear and my personal experiences with gear to belittle or ridicule anyone else....but i know i can help some people save money and time if they have open ears and eyes....and unlike other people here, i have absolutely 0 interest in selling one brand over the other....
anyway...i have a feeling nothing will change anyway....
best to everybody and their families for the new year....it will be interesting....
this should also be a time to reflect on a very interesting and strange decade that i haven't heard a good name for yet....
-
this should also be a time to reflect on a very interesting and strange decade that i haven't heard a good name for yet....
Just today I heard "the naughties."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/naught (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/naught)
-
i am not gone, i am not so fast leaving a forum where i have put in so much time, sharing experiences but getting interesting views and opinions as well. but it does not inspire me much, if i get the feeling that i am boring people here because the definition of this forum is only for medium format discussions.
Hi Rainer,
you are NOT boring people and your input is always valued and respected!
Murray
-
I definitely second that.
-
1. I believe the forums should be separated by what is in front of the lens (i.e., landscapes, fashion, portraiture, travel, etc. as opposed to by what is behind the lens.) I believe the contributors in the various sections would have more in common then, and perhaps more useful info to share with one another. IMO just because I have a similar camera as the next guy does not mean that we have a lot to share - aside from talking about the cameras themselves...
Doesn't just about every professional have various formats? I think the separation by cameras types is the more gear head/amateur approach. Just my humble opinion.
2. I believe that the vendors here should have VENDOR clearly visible in their profile to the left of the forum entries, so we all know what's what here. It just feels very sketchy not knowing who is selling things and who is not.
Agreed on both, but especially on 1st point. Having the subforums named after formats, lenses and other assorted gear just further encourages measurebators, pixel peepers and other gear geeks* to concentrate on what should be merely peripheral aspects of photography - or at least not 99% of the discussion as it is now.
Then again, the only forum devoted to photography as an art is the quietest one, so I'm not holding my breath
* I'm all of the above to a certain extent.
-
Hi Rainer,
you are NOT boring people and your input is always valued and respected!
Murray
hi murray,
thank you.
in fact i dont feel "not wanted" here at all, but what i mean is that i dont enter forums which clearly exclude certain themes with exactly this themes.
i dont do the same with singular treads, someone called it hitch-hiking treads or forums... like that expression.
i.m.o. MR should go back to the naming as it was before, everything was right as it was.
-
1. I believe the forums should be separated by what is in front of the lens (i.e., landscapes, fashion, portraiture, travel, etc. as opposed to by what is behind the lens.) I believe the contributors in the various sections would have more in common then, and perhaps more useful info to share with one another. IMO just because I have a similar camera as the next guy does not mean that we have a lot to share - aside from talking about the cameras themselves...
Doesn't just about every professional have various formats? I think the separation by cameras types is the more gear head/amateur approach. Just my humble opinion.
Agreed 100%.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Well, I will risk disagreeing with Lisa. I think that separating this forum into forums grouped by photography type would kill them all. I like reading this forum for the variety.
-
From my years of reading these forums it seems to me that some people actually prefer the specs and the tests to the actual shooting. I will never understand this thought process and it always causes a massive warning sound to go off when I sense that. I've never been one to buy something and then test the hell out of it. I can see the images it produces. I know the situation I shot it with. I know if something doesn't seem right. Testing, it seems, is a substitute for actually shooting something interesting. Don't get me wrong. Whatever flicks your Bic, but really, does this constant - my test is better than your test - bug anyone else but me??
-
It just feels very sketchy not knowing who is selling things and who is not.
we is all sellin' things ... ; )
... but i too doesn't likes the feels of sketchiness.
-
... it seems to me that some people actually prefer the specs and the tests to the actual shooting.
yes, them peoples is called 'measurbators'.
... and they is an integral part of the ecosystem.
-
IMO
With this in mind I find it completely amazing that for a week or so, there were begs, suggestions and pleas to Michael for this section to become the sole domain of medium format "users". Mostly to stop the comments of anyone that uses use a "35mm camera" and has an opinion, post a result or worse even a comparison.
So we got a name change and look at the result.
Now the forum has returned to normal, which means it has become the domain of the medium format sales people. At last count I totaled 5 ( Plus Reps), From Columbia, England, New York, Miami and of course Atlanta and we've got vague and not so vague comments from dealers regarding the validity of a test, comparing two medium format cameras, reprocessing of the files and more posting of mediocre photographs than the cover of a London tabloid with a dig or two thrown in at the dslr 35mm set.
(BTW: Just a suggestion to anyone that sells cameras. Please post a pretty photograph. Sometimes I think it is the goal of every medium format camera dealer in the world to shoot alley's, skies, grey rainy days, street bums, Grade C models with amateur makeup and hair, fruit and of course the obligatory color chart, just to prove that their $40,000 camera system can show detail even in an ugly photograph.)
Point is this or any section of any forum is never just about that one single title and never will be.
I do respect Michael and his decision to do whatever he wants with his forum, but lately we've seen a exodus of people who actually make a living working with high end cameras and equipment and other than stopping the dslr talk (to some extent) this forum still mentions post processing, storage devices, tripods, lighting pc vs. mac and of course the constant medium format sales message.
Gosh, they've even run off the photographer who was instrumental in designing the Sinar Artech camera because he showed how close the new Canon tilt shifts were to medium format quality. That had to send a cold chill up the tripod carrying medium format guys, because the mirror up tripod crowd seems to be the last real domain of the expert pixel peepers.
I'd love to see a rename of this section, but not one based on format, just based on high end cameras. I don't care if someone is an amateur or professional as long as they are working at the highest level their talents and pocketbooks allow.
In fact call it "money talks" because the price of the previous generation medium format back has fallen to around the price of the last generation high end dslr, or name it "any camera that cost more than $5,000".
I think this would bring healthy debate, an exchange of knowledge and of course there will be the brand worshipers, the format pixel peepers and the sales messages to kill the buzz, but at least it won't be exclusionary.
This opens up discussion of how to make the leap from still to video and back, what system is "actually best" for a certain project and how all of these cameras work in real world conditions.
How about keeping the forum open to imagination, like MT's plunger cam, or some guy that does mount a boris tilt shift on a Canon 5d2, or how about a plunger cam video? . . . anything that is not just the normal, constant talk about pixels.
If not just let it run at whatever it's called today and let Phase and Hasselblad dealers beat themselves into oblivion selling to the last 6 landscape photographers trying to desperately prove that their system really is better than the other guys.
Or let the topics range from comparing 8x10 film to a medium format back, or asking about the Hy6 prism. I hate to bring this up but 8x10 film cameras and hy6 prism's are somewhat dead end systems. You may like them, but give it another week and you'll see both on the Antique Roadshow.
The funny thing about all of this is the medium format sales people come on here to move product, but if they throw everyone but a medium format back owner out the door, who they gonna sell to? Maybe each other, cause they all seem to eventually become absorbed or work for the "competition".
Now that I think of it, maybe it's best to just let nature and Darwin run it's course.
IMO
BC
I use to think it should be changed to a pro section but today, to me, it seems pros don't use mf anymore. Only the amateurs can afford it and can put up with the awful workflow as they don't have a client up their bum. I'm jealous of them.
I would say I know 100+- working pros personally. Of them maybe 15 own a mf back. Of them, not 1 is less than 3 years old.
-
but today, to me, it seems pros don't use mf anymore. Only the amateurs can afford it
Most bizarre and ironic sentence I've ever seen posted here. And I agree with it wholeheartedly.
Amateur goes out to shoot, then comes home after sunset. Then thinks, "Hmm I'm hungry, let's go eat, and get a drink", so he does. Pro comes home, then thinks, "Damn, I'm hungry, I need a drink", but then he realizes he's got to convert all those RAWs tonight, into JPGs, for client review tomorrow. So he orders Dominoes, and gets a Snicker bar out of the hotel vending machine. The pro goes thru that routine three or four times, and then miraculously, the fifth job, the Hasselblad is gone and in its place, lying on the bad hotel bedspread is a Nikon or Canon. He still orders Dominoes, but at least he gets eight hours sleep that night.
Key words responsible for the switch:
* Trustable LCD.
* Easy to use Live View.
* Bulletproof fast tethering.
* Fast lenses.
* High ASA.
* Tilt/Shift lenses.
* File sizes appropriate for jobs.
* Rent anything, most anywhere.
* Easy to own backup bodies.
* Video, to throw a bone to clients.
* Good fast autofocus.
* Easy software; no input profiles to mess with.
* Open the box, and get to work.
-
I like keeping it a medium format and such forum. This seems to be the main forum around for medium format. There's forums everywhere for small format and for other topics. If you have trouble with your 5D2 you can get an answer in minutes at Dpreview. There really isn't much space just for medium format and larger.
Bill
-
hi murray,
thank you.
in fact i dont feel "not wanted" here at all, but what i mean is that i dont enter forums which clearly exclude certain themes with exactly this themes.
i dont do the same with singular treads, someone called it hitch-hiking treads or forums... like that expression.
i.m.o. MR should go back to the naming as it was before, everything was right as it was.
+1!
-
Well, I will risk disagreeing with Lisa. I think that separating this forum into forums grouped by photography type would kill them all. I like reading this forum for the variety.
I agree with that, and would add that because I earned my crust from fashion and calendar art does not mean that as I don't do much landscape myself I can't or don't appreciate seeing good work in that medium or any other. As I said before, cross-polination is what keeps the species going - look at the alternative: inbreeding.
Rob C
-
From my years of reading these forums it seems to me that some people actually prefer the specs and the tests to the actual shooting. I will never understand this thought process and it always causes a massive warning sound to go off when I sense that. I've never been one to buy something and then test the hell out of it. I can see the images it produces. I know the situation I shot it with. I know if something doesn't seem right. Testing, it seems, is a substitute for actually shooting something interesting. Don't get me wrong. Whatever flicks your Bic, but really, does this constant - my test is better than your test - bug anyone else but me??
Your practical 'test by using in real life' system of equipment appraisal is as good as it gets. I think that all of us with any experience already know what's likely to suit us in the field. Whether or not the equipment lives up to the spec is another matter, but you still have to suck it and see really to find out for yourself.
I was stung by both Bronica and Pentax 6x7 systems after my departure from Hasselblad's 500 Series. But I knew Mamiya would never cut it for my work either and, by the time I was emotionally ready to go back into Hasselblad, life had moved on and it didn't make any difference anymore. So there you are - you can read all the brochures, all the user-comments you like, but in the end, it comes down to how stuff works with you.
Rob C
-
There are too many questions that are simply not subject related, so there will be always a need for something like a MF section. Think about questions like ´best tethered solution for camera X´ or ´how useable are the CF lenses for a Contax camera´ etc.
There is a subforum for landscape photography (as well as for locations). Maybe a studio subforum would be nice and an architecture one? But that wouldn´t handle all the tech questions.
RE: the amount of reps and dealers. If there are not presenting themselves people complain about their absence, if they are there (other?) people complain about their presence. I value their input as long as they make known what they are.
-
yes, them peoples is called 'measurbators'.
... and they is an integral part of the ecosystem.
"pixel-peepiential material"
(from 1001 Noisy Cameras (http://www.1001noisycameras.com/2009/12/discover-new-sites-and-blogs-new-edition.html). wish I could take credit...)
-
Its a weird old world
Every knows why this board is a bit special - but its hard to define there are two set of nuggets on this board..
Top of the Game Experience
We are lucky over the years to have had people top of their game giving great info - that is really the valuable point - many of those shooters happened to use MF but dont any more all the time
MF specific tech
- Will my $12k bellows camera get infinity focus with a Rodshcher 12mmXXL Digibongle lens - the manufactuers dont know but someone here does
-Ive got Crapture One running on a H1 body and Contax lenses on Panda OS tethered to a Cow - why doenst it work - some one here knows - no helpdesk ever will
Its keeping those top of the game nuggets that are important - even if they relate to DSLRs
The truth is that tech advancements, market pressures mean those people dont always use MF now but if they post in the DSLR boards they are lost in white noise
I dont post here much any more because my D3 and Hassy/22p have worked fine and pleased my clients for years now - really Ive become disinterested in camera tech - which is great
But if Im having trouble tethering my 5dmk2 - I wouldnt want advice from DPReviers - Id want to come here
S
-
I dont post here much any more because my D3 and Hassy/22p have worked fine and pleased my clients for years now - really Ive become disinterested in camera tech - which is great
Boy there is the money quote of the year (and on the very last day to boot).
I know I've had it with the upgrades to cameras, computers and software. Not only money bu the time. There was a day back in 02 when I thought my Sinar's, Horseman's and Hasselblad's would last me until I retired. Then I bought a 1Ds. You all know the rest of the story.
I sense that I'm not alone. No one asks me about my digital caneras anymore, they jut don't care. All they want is a good file, and quickly after the shoot, thank you. My current gear gives them that and its paid for, just like my old Sinar's Horseman's and Hasselbald's. Now if I could only make it to retirement with this stuff....
Lets just talk about photography, and some gear now and then for those who need it.
-
The truth is that tech advancements, market pressures mean those people dont always use MF now but if they post in the DSLR boards they are lost in white noise
I dont post here much any more because my D3 and Hassy/22p have worked fine and pleased my clients for years now - really Ive become disinterested in camera tech - which is great
But if Im having trouble tethering my 5dmk2 - I wouldnt want advice from DPReviers - Id want to come here
This is so true! It is why I come here to read as well. I want to read about MFD pros shooting 35! Another interesting writer is Kirk Tuck who (for fun's sake really, trying to prove a point) is on occasion using tiny cameras to make commercial portraits.
A thought: If they (the market) start giving digital cameras away there will be some shakedowns at first but it will correct itself and true quality work will stand the test. People using MFD by and large make the best images, not because of their gear, but from their skill. The sooner this MFD forum comes to grip with that the more peace there will be around here.
-
There was also a time when worrying about gear worked
My 16mp Kodak Proback basically got me into magazine work because my files were publishable unlike my digital rivals with their 2.4mp nikon D1 s - it put me in the class of the tranny shooters and away from the newspaper only shooters and I was able to deliver a week faster than the tranny boys
"A thought: If they (the market) start giving digital cameras away there will be some shakedowns'
The market does 'give away' digital cameras - or thats what it seems like if you ever forked out for 3 nikon D1 s at $7k a pop
S
-
You sure can't please all the people all the time Michael. I do know one thing. People have come to you / this forum, often from your credible reviews (before the forum as I did), and your honesty, and experience, is what is attractive. I think often it is expected to see those qualities in your forums. It is the factual info or the credible debates that make this place of strong value.....for me at least. And the regulars I have had contact with have really been stand up people.
Change in the climate of technology is constant, and this forum is a great place for people of different experiences from all walks of life in professional or hobbieist work to appreciate the quality of posts found here and respect others views with a bit of reservation at times, and hope with some true respectable experience, can learn and make transitions from systems more smooth and knowledgable.
I don't know what title is good or bad, but if it keeps the forum NON commercial its a good thing, as there are very qualified dealers that are pro's and I like and respect their view. Douglas has taken time to help me with silly C1 issues (my experience).
But the reason for this uproar in the first place is because we keep hearing how the DSLR is nearly or just as good as MF, and the different examples and same response on how it isnt so, to people that have not even tried one, or used it, or even care to understand the difference...And for their need, they don't need it....better for them.
I won't go into it, but any pro or hobbiest that has a MF can surely appreciate the DSLR and knows that a MF is not to compete in its territoty....And in the same respect, anyone that is critical in IQ knows that the MF has a value for certain situations that are very clear cut where the DSLR cannot compete. One thing certain is that this closing of gaps, as things are getting better (perhaps without an AA filter on DSLR's things would be even closer) should shake up the dealers to get a little more agressive on prices, and value in what they put out.
That is my 2...
-
You sure can't please all the people all the time Michael. I do know one thing. People have come to you / this forum, often from your credible reviews (before the forum as I did), and your honesty, and experience, is what is attractive. I think often it is expected to see those qualities in your forums. It is the factual info or the credible debates that make this place of strong value.....for me at least. And the regulars I have had contact with have really been stand up people.
Change in the climate of technology is constant, and this forum is a great place for people of different experiences from all walks of life in professional or hobbieist work to appreciate the quality of posts found here and respect others views with a bit of reservation at times, and hope with some true respectable experience, can learn and make transitions from systems more smooth and knowledgable.
I don't know what title is good or bad, but if it keeps the forum NON commercial its a good thing, as there are very qualified dealers that are pro's and I like and respect their view. Douglas has taken time to help me with silly C1 issues (my experience).
But the reason for this uproar in the first place is because we keep hearing how the DSLR is nearly or just as good as MF, and the different examples and same response on how it isnt so, to people that have not even tried one, or used it, or even care to understand the difference...And for their need, they don't need it....better for them.
I won't go into it, but any pro or hobbiest that has a MF can surely appreciate the DSLR and knows that a MF is not to compete in its territoty....And in the same respect, anyone that is critical in IQ knows that the MF has a value for certain situations that are very clear cut where the DSLR cannot compete. One thing certain is that this closing of gaps, as things are getting better (perhaps without an AA filter on DSLR's things would be even closer) should shake up the dealers to get a little more agressive on prices, and value in what they put out.
That is my 2...
"Closer and closer": that is the thing. Before the maturing of digital technology, the distinctions between large, medium and small format were much greater. In film days (ah, the pungent smell of stop bath in the morning), 4x5 was standard (no pun intended) for architectural photography, medium format was a practical alternative for some situations, and small format was only occasionally used for this purpose. Now, some serious architectural photographers can make their living shooting small format exclusively, although they will effectively create medium format images sometimes with stitching. That is a major change. It appears that even some architectural photographers who prefer medium format and use it as much as possible will use small format as a practical and less expensive back up. It seems to me that, if demanding architectural photographers take small format seriously, that warrants some consideration in a sub-forum devoted ostensibly to medium format.
David Eichler
-
"Closer and closer": that is the thing. Before the maturing of digital technology, the distinctions between large, medium and small format were much greater. In film days (ah, the pungent smell of stop bath in the morning), 4x5 was standard (no pun intended) for architectural photography, medium format was a practical alternative for some situations, and small format was only occasionally used for this purpose. Now, serious architectural photographers can make their living shooting small format exclusively, although they will effectively create medium format images sometimes with stitching. That is a major change. It appears that even some architectural photographers who prefer medium format and use it as much as possible will use small format as a practical and less expensive back up. It seems to me that if demanding architectural photographers take small format seriously, that warrants some consideration in a sub-forum devoted ostensibly to medium format.
David Eichler
I've been pulling 3 to 4 am every night (morning) doing post production on this big end of the year rush project so sitting on an opposite desk is my TV. You know those nights where you turn it on some channel and you really don't have the time or inclination to change the station, mostly because of the fear something might come on that's interesting that will make you stop working, so last night it was on some cable's pbs station and the guy being interviewed on Charlie Rose was the CEO of Sirius radio.
I didn't really listen, just kept working until I heard this CEO say "the advertising model is not sustainable for media in today's world".
I kind of hit the brakes on that and thought for a moment, what's this guy talking about, then he explained that he was previously the CEO of CBS and came from the days of client's would pay 10's of millions to run a Super Bowl spot, not be able to track it's results, never know if it worked or not but we're always standing in line to write the check.
He said when Google came out they F__ked up the magic, because for the first time an advertiser could track to see if their promotion was working. (His words).
In other words he said they pissed on the parade.
That's what digital has done to Music, Photography, Art, Print, all forms of media. It has pissed on the parade or to be more pc it has changed our role as photographers and more importantly changed the tools we use.
Gone are the days that any camera you buy is a 10 year system and a photographer is hired to shoot One shot. In fact I don't believe there is any camera in the market that is exactly right for our new job description.
This year every photographer I know has complained about money, but the changes I've seen this year and most of last year was not the money available for a project but the time. We are now squeezing everything into hours not days, minutes not hours.
Yesterday the client had a change and wanted to add wedding rings to three advertising images. I sent a production person out to buy 4 rings, put them on white, shot 6 angles of each, built a gallery, send the raws to the retoucher, the gallery to the AD for selection the results to the retoucher and the finished images are out in 4 hours. 4 hours from shoot the rings to the client is downloading the finished images.
I guess my point of all of this in commerce, camera format is not that relevant and surely wasn't in my thought process yesterday when all I had was a few hours to change an image. Photographers may think so on the day of the shoot, or may like their favorite system, but once a project has gone through 5 stages of retouching, 6 different crops, people swaps, background changes, it just ceases to be any format.
In fact in the real world what is the format? A laptop, a 24" monitor, a dell, an apple, an Eizo or a printed page? Format really is the final destination.
So if any camera makers are reading this forum I suggest tearing it up and starting from a clean sheet. Forget about formats, ground glass (plastic) 2:3 or 4:5 crops, forget about all this legacy stuff and really step into today. Make a camera that tethers easy, has an EVIL viewfinder, movable crops, shoots video and stills, live view for critical focus and moveable iso.
Stop this proprietary, secret file format stuff and open the file up so people can write plugs ins and apps that go directly in camera to make any film the look you want. (See Iphone Apps). In fact allow me to embed my film look into a raw file that any processor will see (including photoshop).
Write some raw file compression schemes that allow us to get a project into the 500mb territory. Data storage, backup and delivery is a monster right now and since I'm sitting on hundreds of terabytes of images and each project easily goes to multiple terabytes per project I can't stress how important file size is. In fact in the last 7 days I've shipped over 2 terabytes of finished images on line through links.
Stop fooling around with almost video on a still camera system, almost stills on a video camera system and give us something that just requires a change of some module to allow our one system to work in both arenas. (see RED's wish list).
And most of all when you want information and feedback, don't go to the photographer's that will do anything to be featured by your camera company, go to the photographers and their clients that are producing work in the new real world.
In fact listen to this Sirius Radio CEO when he says Content Is King, because he's right and I can promise you he doesn't care if it was shot on a Canon, a Hasselblad a Red or a Casio. He cares if it get's ratings, good customer results and is unique because beautiful and/or unique get's attention. Of course he also cares about the bottom line and if any of those mentioned brands gets the desired result then he's fine, we're all fine.
In fact if you told this CEO or his ad agency that I contribute on a forum that only allows talk of one type of camera format his eyes would probably cross. I might as well tell him to forget satellite radio and go back to the phonograph.
So with all of this in mind it's not the camera I think of anymore unless the camera gets in my way and it's definitely not the format of the camera or the ability to produce micro detail under controlled conditions at 200% web crops. It's what I produce that gets us work and most importantly it's the final destination of the photograph that I think about . . . that and what's next ?
BC
-
I've been pulling 3 to 4 am every night (morning) doing post production on this big end of the year rush project so sitting on an opposite desk is my TV. You know those nights where you turn it on some channel and you really don't have the time or inclination to change the station, mostly because of the fear something might come on that's interesting that will make you stop working, so last night it was on some cable's pbs station and the guy being interviewed on Charlie Rose was the CEO of Sirius radio.
I didn't really listen, just kept working until I heard this CEO say "the advertising model is not sustainable for media in today's world".
I kind of hit the brakes on that and thought for a moment, what's this guy talking about, then he explained that he was previously the CEO of CBS and came from the days of client's would pay 10's of millions to run a Super Bowl spot, not be able to track it's results, never know if it worked or not but we're always standing in line to write the check.
He said when Google came out they F__ked up the magic, because for the first time an advertiser could track to see if their promotion was working. (His words).
In other words he said they pissed on the parade.
That's what digital has done to Music, Photography, Art, Print, all forms of media. It has pissed on the parade or to be more pc it has changed our role as photographers and more importantly changed the tools we use.
Gone are the days that any camera you buy is a 10 year system and a photographer is hired to shoot One shot. In fact I don't believe there is any camera in the market that is exactly right for our new job description.
This year every photographer I know has complained about money, but the changes I've seen this year and most of last year was not the money available for a project but the time. We are now squeezing everything into hours not days, minutes not hours.
Yesterday the client had a change and wanted to add wedding rings to three advertising images. I sent a production person out to buy 4 rings, put them on white, shot 6 angles of each, built a gallery, send the raws to the retoucher, the gallery to the AD for selection the results to the retoucher and the finished images are out in 4 hours. 4 hours from shoot the rings to the client is downloading the finished images.
I guess my point of all of this in commerce, camera format is not that relevant and surely wasn't in my thought process yesterday when all I had was a few hours to change an image. Photographers may think so on the day of the shoot, or may like their favorite system, but once a project has gone through 5 stages of retouching, 6 different crops, people swaps, background changes, it just ceases to be any format.
In fact in the real world what is the format? A laptop, a 24" monitor, a dell, an apple, an Eizo or a printed page? Format really is the final destination.
So if any camera makers are reading this forum I suggest tearing it up and starting from a clean sheet. Forget about formats, ground glass (plastic) 2:3 or 4:5 crops, forget about all this legacy stuff and really step into today. Make a camera that tethers easy, has an EVIL viewfinder, movable crops, shoots video and stills, live view for critical focus and moveable iso.
Stop this proprietary, secret file format stuff and open the file up so people can write plugs ins and apps that go directly in camera to make any film the look you want. (See Iphone Apps). In fact allow me to embed my film look into a raw file that any processor will see (including photoshop).
Write some raw file compression schemes that allow us to get a project into the 500mb territory. Data storage, backup and delivery is a monster right now and since I'm sitting on hundreds of terabytes of images and each project easily goes to multiple terabytes per project I can't stress how important file size is. In fact in the last 7 days I've shipped over 2 terabytes of finished images on line through links.
Stop fooling around with almost video on a still camera system, almost stills on a video camera system and give us something that just requires a change of some module to allow our one system to work in both arenas. (see RED's wish list).
And most of all when you want information and feedback, don't go to the photographer's that will do anything to be featured by your camera company, go to the photographers and their clients that are producing work in the new real world.
In fact listen to this Sirius Radio CEO when he says Content Is King, because he's right and I can promise you he doesn't care if it was shot on a Canon, a Hasselblad a Red or a Casio. He cares if it get's ratings, good customer results and is unique because beautiful and/or unique get's attention. Of course he also cares about the bottom line and if any of those mentioned brands gets the desired result then he's fine, we're all fine.
In fact if you told this CEO or his ad agency that I contribute on a forum that only allows talk of one type of camera format his eyes would probably cross. I might as well tell him to forget satellite radio and go back to the phonograph.
So with all of this in mind it's not the camera I think of anymore unless the camera gets in my way and it's definitely not the format of the camera or the ability to produce micro detail under controlled conditions at 200% web crops. It's what I produce that gets us work and most importantly it's the final destination of the photograph that I think about . . . that and what's next ?
BC
Amen
-
" Pro comes home, then thinks, "Damn, I'm hungry, I need a drink", but then he realizes he's got to convert all those RAWs tonight, into JPGs, for client review tomorrow. So he orders Dominoes, and gets a Snicker bar out of the hotel vending machine. The pro goes thru that routine three or four times, and then miraculously, the fifth job, the Hasselblad is gone and in its place, lying on the bad hotel bedspread is a Nikon or Canon. He still orders Dominoes, but at least he gets eight hours sleep that night."
Not meaning to pick on you but I will use this above quote as a reference. Wouldn't it be preferable for you to relate to what YOU do. I see it quite a bit in here where people respond with a very broad brush as if, what they say, is the way it is - for everyone. You do not know what all pro's do. You know what you do. Please try to speak from your thoughts and your experiences and let all of the other "you's" in the world speak for themselves. A tad too omnipotent to me.
-
" Pro comes home, then thinks, "Damn, I'm hungry, I need a drink", but then he realizes he's got to convert all those RAWs tonight, into JPGs, for client review tomorrow. So he orders Dominoes, and gets a Snicker bar out of the hotel vending machine. The pro goes thru that routine three or four times, and then miraculously, the fifth job, the Hasselblad is gone and in its place, lying on the bad hotel bedspread is a Nikon or Canon. He still orders Dominoes, but at least he gets eight hours sleep that night."
Not meaning to pick on you but I will use this above quote as a reference. Wouldn't it be preferable for you to relate to what YOU do. I see it quite a bit in here where people respond with a very broad brush as if, what they say, is the way it is - for everyone. You do not know what all pro's do. You know what you do. Please try to speak from your thoughts and your experiences and let all of the other "you's" in the world speak for themselves. A tad too omnipotent to me.
Wow...that is simply put so well...."You know what you do". Sooo true.
-
Happy New Year!
Have a look
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_H8TOKcfjg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_H8TOKcfjg)
Best,
Johannes
hahhaa...its obvious the only true winner in the video are the polariods that withstood the sea splash.
-
I’m a landscape photography who just happens to use as his primary choice of equipment a Cambo WRS1000/P45+. The choice word is “primary” as I also have and use a 1DsII that’s been converted to IR as well as a 1DsIII; I’ll also be picking up a Leica M-9 along with a couple of choice lens – all to achieve my chosen profession which is fine art landscape photography.
I don’t care a rats *** what you use to capture your images as you really only have two people who need to be happy; you and the guy buying the end product. What I did get tired of reading was all the comparisons being made between 35mm and MF. It’s comparing apples to olives. There’s no doubt that 35mm is good, there’s little doubt that MF is better just as there’s no doubt that LF is better than MF. Each has it’s own unique use and it’s up to the photographer to figure which took is better suited. Yes I said “tool”. A camera as far as I’m concerned is noting more than a tool or means for capturing an image I can make money on; much the same as a carpenter uses a hammer or saw.
The thread I really enjoyed up to the point of some people screwing around with it was sharing recent works and I was glad to be a participant. If the title says show us your professional works that should mean just that. It should not be meant to be taken as file format specific. Hell a professional can take a great image with a cell phone!
I’ve made a point of staying away from here for a couple months in hopes of a self-policing, self-correcting effect taking place and in some minor part it has.
There’s a lot of discussion of late that this is a “Pro Section”. Since when did pros only use one format? Since when do pros not mentor? When was the last time anyone thanked Michael for putting up with the rude childish behavior that no one would put up with if they were in someone’s home or place of business?
This is the end of a year and the beginning of a new one. I hope that the new year brings a new attitude.
Happy New Year to all!
Don
-
I've been pulling 3 to 4 am every night (morning) doing post production on this big end of the year rush project so sitting on an opposite desk is my TV. You know those nights where you turn it on some channel and you really don't have the time or inclination to change the station, mostly because of the fear something might come on that's interesting that will make you stop working, so last night it was on some cable's pbs station and the guy being interviewed on Charlie Rose was the CEO of Sirius radio.
I didn't really listen, just kept working until I heard this CEO say "the advertising model is not sustainable for media in today's world".
I kind of hit the brakes on that and thought for a moment, what's this guy talking about, then he explained that he was previously the CEO of CBS and came from the days of client's would pay 10's of millions to run a Super Bowl spot, not be able to track it's results, never know if it worked or not but we're always standing in line to write the check.
He said when Google came out they F__ked up the magic, because for the first time an advertiser could track to see if their promotion was working. (His words).
In other words he said they pissed on the parade.
That's what digital has done to Music, Photography, Art, Print, all forms of media. It has pissed on the parade or to be more pc it has changed our role as photographers and more importantly changed the tools we use.
Gone are the days that any camera you buy is a 10 year system and a photographer is hired to shoot One shot. In fact I don't believe there is any camera in the market that is exactly right for our new job description.
This year every photographer I know has complained about money, but the changes I've seen this year and most of last year was not the money available for a project but the time. We are now squeezing everything into hours not days, minutes not hours.
Yesterday the client had a change and wanted to add wedding rings to three advertising images. I sent a production person out to buy 4 rings, put them on white, shot 6 angles of each, built a gallery, send the raws to the retoucher, the gallery to the AD for selection the results to the retoucher and the finished images are out in 4 hours. 4 hours from shoot the rings to the client is downloading the finished images.
I guess my point of all of this in commerce, camera format is not that relevant and surely wasn't in my thought process yesterday when all I had was a few hours to change an image. Photographers may think so on the day of the shoot, or may like their favorite system, but once a project has gone through 5 stages of retouching, 6 different crops, people swaps, background changes, it just ceases to be any format.
In fact in the real world what is the format? A laptop, a 24" monitor, a dell, an apple, an Eizo or a printed page? Format really is the final destination.
So if any camera makers are reading this forum I suggest tearing it up and starting from a clean sheet. Forget about formats, ground glass (plastic) 2:3 or 4:5 crops, forget about all this legacy stuff and really step into today. Make a camera that tethers easy, has an EVIL viewfinder, movable crops, shoots video and stills, live view for critical focus and moveable iso.
Stop this proprietary, secret file format stuff and open the file up so people can write plugs ins and apps that go directly in camera to make any film the look you want. (See Iphone Apps). In fact allow me to embed my film look into a raw file that any processor will see (including photoshop).
Write some raw file compression schemes that allow us to get a project into the 500mb territory. Data storage, backup and delivery is a monster right now and since I'm sitting on hundreds of terabytes of images and each project easily goes to multiple terabytes per project I can't stress how important file size is. In fact in the last 7 days I've shipped over 2 terabytes of finished images on line through links.
Stop fooling around with almost video on a still camera system, almost stills on a video camera system and give us something that just requires a change of some module to allow our one system to work in both arenas. (see RED's wish list).
And most of all when you want information and feedback, don't go to the photographer's that will do anything to be featured by your camera company, go to the photographers and their clients that are producing work in the new real world.
In fact listen to this Sirius Radio CEO when he says Content Is King, because he's right and I can promise you he doesn't care if it was shot on a Canon, a Hasselblad a Red or a Casio. He cares if it get's ratings, good customer results and is unique because beautiful and/or unique get's attention. Of course he also cares about the bottom line and if any of those mentioned brands gets the desired result then he's fine, we're all fine.
In fact if you told this CEO or his ad agency that I contribute on a forum that only allows talk of one type of camera format his eyes would probably cross. I might as well tell him to forget satellite radio and go back to the phonograph.
So with all of this in mind it's not the camera I think of anymore unless the camera gets in my way and it's definitely not the format of the camera or the ability to produce micro detail under controlled conditions at 200% web crops. It's what I produce that gets us work and most importantly it's the final destination of the photograph that I think about . . . that and what's next ?
BC
Hey BC,
With you, could not have said it better.
Will anyone hear you is the question.
-
Hey BC,
With you, could not have said it better.
Will anyone hear you is the question.
B. Cooter speaks really well, no doubt about it, and he speaks from deep experience and insight. I very much enjoy his posts, and I read them all thoroughly, looking for little tidbits I can use, and ways of thinking about the fastest-paced segments of the U.S. fashion industry, but he still speaks only for that segment. Fine Art and Landscape photographers are taking their time as much as they ever were, because that is how they get the best images, and thus the highest return. There is also a slower part of the fashion segment which isn't shooting video and isn't working until 3 or 4 every night, and he can't speak for them either. Personally, I am very happy that there is a large variety of experiences here, from Don Libby to B. Cooter to Rainer Viertlböck and Christopher Barrett, and so on. It makes this an interesting place to read about it all.
-
I've been pulling 3 to 4 am every night (morning) doing post production
mr cooter, you seem like a pretty busy guy. why don't you have an assistant doing all the post for you? sure its good to do an edit, but all the processing and backup etc you could be getting some rest. im sure it would improve your quality of work ultimately, and reduce stress levels.
paul
-
B. Cooter speaks really well, no doubt about it, and he speaks from deep experience and insight. I very much enjoy his posts, and I read them all thoroughly, looking for little tidbits I can use, and ways of thinking about the fastest-paced segments of the U.S. fashion industry, but he still speaks only for that segment. Fine Art and Landscape photographers are taking their time as much as they ever were, because that is how they get the best images, and thus the highest return. There is also a slower part of the fashion segment which isn't shooting video and isn't working until 3 or 4 every night, and he can't speak for them either. Personally, I am very happy that there is a large variety of experiences here, from Don Libby to B. Cooter to Rainer Viertlböck and Christopher Barrett, and so on. It makes this an interesting place to read about it all.
True. As there is no doubt in mind that BC puts out top notch work from looking at his body of work, and recently seeing it in magazine print. Bravo, and in many ways I do belive a differnt and new system may emerge....And I want to say that in the vast body of work, I didn't see a demand for MF, but who is anyone to say such, as a level of pixel perfection can be personal, until you get to a point in subject matter that it is preferred and needed, I.E. Beauty, Still Life macro, jewelry, etc.
But as the Don put it...they are TOOLS, and we always have more than one to use for the specific job. (sometimes you need a scalpel, sometimes a hatchet....(sounds familiar also).
I don't know any artist who uses 1 brush to cover all their styles of work.
-
Well, imo , I know exactly why I'm using an MFDB, and I know why I have no choice but using one in what I do.
I'm using 35mm , too, and I also know why it must be a full-format camera with 20+MP for my purposes.
Neither is better than the other, or a pinhole camera, depending on what one's requirements are.
But in this forum , most times all kind of comparisons come down to people claiming the more expensive system is equaled by the less expensive one.
That's wrong; a pro uses the the sort of tool he needs, for reasons which amateurs and semi-pros don't understand, due to a lack of experience in the business.
I for one am very interested about any of Rainer's testings, as I know where he's coming from and is in a position to judge not only qualiilty, but comparable usefulness of gear.
The Red and such are a very interesting topics, as this is a development pro's will need to face.
But if a Sony or such gave me a better file, but I can't get rentals in every major city, or the file size is too small when I need Aptus 75 16bit size and a view camera for a particular assignment, it's out of the equation, like it doesn't even exist, period.
Anyone who wonders why that is, doesn't know the very basics of the craft, is not in a position to discuss better or worse, or anything related.
And these amateurs, they won't even listen, telling you how magazine x printed their cropped-sensor thingy shot no problem, how there's no difference , hence their gear is good enough for everything else, yadada...
If I dare bring it up, in the former Rob Galbreith forums, MF discussion was almost exclusivly mid-hightier professional, and I learned something everyday.
Here , at least the manufacturer reps and dealers are still around, and a few pros; so I still learn something every other week.
-
But in this forum , most times all kind of comparisons come down to people claiming the more expensive system is equaled by the less expensive one.
That's wrong; a pro uses the the sort of tool he needs, for reasons which amateurs and semi-pros don't understand, due to a lack of experience in the business.
If I dare bring it up, in the former Rob Galbreith forums, MF discussion was almost exclusivly mid-hightier professional, and I learned something everyday.
Here , at least the manufacturer reps and dealers are still around, and a few pros; so I still learn something every other week.
the problem is that in many situations the cheaper systems get the job done better, faster and with less problems....and the slightly lesser quality is just not an issue anymore....
price also does not mean much anymore...i saw a Hy6 LV75 demo body lens back for under 10000 on ebay...that file is definitely better then all DSLR.....and other backs are available much cheaper....
in the days of the RG forum the difference between files from DMF and DSLR were substantial....that difference has gotten smaller and smaller....
nobody here has ever claimed that any DSLR has a similar file to a P65....or that all jobs can be shot with one kit.....
it just seems that some people paid a lot of money for their DMF systems (as did i....) and now feel like they have to protect their status? or something like that?
i don't get why people are so militant about this whole thing anyway...i mean who cares what you shoot with? who cares what the title of this forum is?
one thing is for sure...if a certain architecture photographer with quite a bit of experience and a very nice body of work is looking into DSLR T/S lenses for serious work which has always been the domain of LF and later DMF, people should listen and think....
even the catholic church had to admit at one point (after burning some people to show who's boss....) that the earth is in fact round....
enjoy your equipment....use it to your advantage and come here for info...and simply skip the heretics....
-
Happy new year
-
why don't you have an assistant doing all the post for you?
Everyone has their own business model and mine works for me.
The project I referenced in a large body of work and I have two retouchers contracted and working hard, though with client revisions coming in late in the day, retouchers working until mid evening, large downloads to my server at 340 to 400mb per section, that have to be opened, corrected and checked . . . then put back onto the server for either further corrections or client downloads equals very late nights.
The last two years I've looked into the screen of the new reality of our industry and made a vow that this is the way it is, so I decdied to accept it and get on with it.
The goal, the only goal is to meet client deadlines and exceed expectations and nothing should go out without my review, or input.
Once again this is personal but I'm not the Grapes Of Wrath type that sees a possible drought, looks up into the sky and prays for rain. I've seeded the clouds myself and that comes through sweat equity.
But that's my system, if there is an easier way I'm open to it, but then again I have no complaints.
Also for what it's worth, most of my clients are working close to the same hours. I assume that's why their working.
BC
-
In fact listen to this Sirius Radio CEO when he says Content Is King, because he's right and I can promise you he doesn't care if it was shot on a Canon, a Hasselblad a Red or a Casio. He cares if it get's ratings, good customer results and is unique because beautiful and/or unique get's attention. Of course he also cares about the bottom line and if any of those mentioned brands gets the desired result then he's fine, we're all fine.
Exactly. In the end, cheap and "works" wins every time, because other than maybe for a photo gallery or a similar specific use where people are interested in every last detail, the boss will go for the $2500 camera that looks "good enough" almost every time. And, to be honest, it really does almost every time.
A good example is if it's going to be in a magazine. Most clients want roughly 300dpi optical equivalent at best(similar to dye-sub@300dpi). Given that with framing and borders and so on, you're looking at a realistic 8x10 for even a full page ad - maybe closer to 7x8 if it's positioned horizontally and has copy above or below it. Even at 400dpi 25MP is just overkill by the time it hits the actual page. A Sony A850/900 will be closer to 500dpi. Plainly overkill.
**from the adobe cs2 manual/help file**
Newspaper Ad (65-85 lpi) 130 - 170 ppi
Average Magazine & Brochure (133 lpi) 200 - 266 ppi
High End Magazine & Brochure (150 lpi) 225 - 300 ppi
Annual Report (177 lpi) 265 - 350 ppi
Fine Art & Coffee Table Books (200 lpi) 300 - 400 ppi
****
Specs on the A850/A900
• 6048 x 4032 (24M 3:2) - 11X17 is roughly(due to the 3:2 aspect ratio): (200X1.666X11)X(200X1.666X17) - 3666X5666, or 20MP - and that's rarely used, if ever, since actual printed materials tend to max out at 200LPI for most non-specialized things. The 1.666 is to convert, roughly, for the Bayer pattern's effect on the LPI printed versus digital in both dimensions. 24.6MP is more than your client will likely ever use.
Essentially these tools are all overkill - just take the shot, submit the result after you've cleaned it up/tweaked with it in raw, and let them deal with the rest.
The client doesn't care. They want their image to stick in their magazine or catalog and you could do that with any of these higher-end cameras. So limiting this part of the forum to one type of camera when they all are pretty much well beyond what's required for an actual job is silly.
Perhaps a better change, then, would be to have a "professional/high-end photography(20mp+)" label? This would cover the high-end stuff while leaving the consumer cameras and discussions in their own area.
-
BC,
I like your riding. Maybe I want you to work for me one day.
now here is the problem, some people like to be free,
they want to shot what ever they like when they like it, they don't want to eat pizza
or be up all night
I, me my self dear anyone the ask me i need it tomorrow, if you
don't have it, someone else will.
I will tell the person, get lost, go in get it from someone else.
Money is good but freedom is much better, no one, no body will tell me what to do, when to do it ( well except my wife, only because she is through).
But think about those the shoot landscape (me) I make good money to pay for my equipments, in no one tell me what to do.
So lets end it here. is new year, and we need to enjoy it.
Between DSLR and MF is like night in day. No way the anyone the shoot with MF will ever shot landscape with dslr.
you being attacked on two fronts, one inside and one outside. Stay tough, you’re going to need all your strength to get through this, but you will!
Now lets all put it to rest. No more post about this. ≈ Happy New Year≈
-
No way the anyone the shoot with MF will ever shot landscape with dslr.
Yeah ... there's no way any of us lowly DSLR-shooters could have ever blown out the sky as well as you did on your home page image with our crappy little cameras ...
Takes a big-a$$ back to get such a pure white with such perfect tonality.
Happy New Year!
-
Yeah ... there's no way any of us lowly DSLR-shooters could have ever blown out the sky as well as you did on your home page image with our crappy little cameras ...
Takes a big-a$$ back to get such a pure white with such perfect tonality.
Happy New Year!
People like it like that sold 53 times 34x46
LOL
-
People like it like that sold 53 times 34x46
LOL
Which just goes to show P.T. Barnum was right...
-
People like it like that sold 53 times 34x46
LOL
hahaha
-
People like it like that sold 53 times 34x46
LOL
From what I hear, pure white does enlarge quite well!
-
pure white, sold 103 year sold 2009 size 24x34 h1-p25 wow.
This pay for p45+, printer, travel, and my remy martin cocna Lois x111.
so dslr
BTW I'm from Dominican Republic
Ω.Happy new year again.Ω
I have no payne
-
Which just goes to show P.T. Barnum was right...
P.T. Barnum wouldn't even believe that.
-
Or let the topics range from comparing 8x10 film to a medium format back, or asking about the Hy6 prism. I hate to bring this up but 8x10 film cameras and hy6 prism's are somewhat dead end systems. You may like them, but give it another week and you'll see both on the Antique Roadshow.
BC
?!?!
A disappointing remark, IMHO.
A number of contributors to this forum write about equipment they actually own, use or would like to acquire. Nothing wrong with that. If a particular issue is not to your likening, just ignore the posting. There really is no need for ranting about what you think are "dead end" systems or not, and denigrating what other people are using. The value of the equipment is in its use and that may be different for every one of us here.
-
One of the reasons this Medium format + digital backs forum is so popular - apart from it's highly appreciated contributors (you know who you are) : medium format "isn't there yet"
We've waited for years to have 35mm where it should be: swift capturing full size sensors, high iso and 21+ mp.
MF on the other hand, even at 65mp isn't. I wouldn't say MF should be limited to 20+, just because current clients need no more. To be able to produce unlimited quality, one should at least capture in megapixels what the lenses allow. In MF 65mp seems to be the limit for the 645 format. But 6x7 or even 7x7 should be able to make use of 90mp. Sounds like much, but not too long ago MF was 6mp on a full size 35mm sensor.
Obviously 35mm with the right PP software can do the trick for jobs we used to need MF for and commercial shooters don't need more than 12mp in general. But I'm thinking of producing stunning image quality for museums and art galleries.
We'll always have Terry's and Jurgens who will shoot 35mm only, but I'm talking of the new Helmuts and the current Inez and Vinoodh who will be able to make use of such state of the art camera systems.
The moment these cameras start to behave like the current 35mm DLSR's: 5 fps, perfect ISO up to iso 1600, RAW, sRAW, 35mm (klein bild) will become the size/format for photo journalists only again, the professionals 35mm originally was designed for.
Let's not stop where we are now.....
Exactly. In the end, cheap and "works" wins every time, because other than maybe for a photo gallery or a similar specific use where people are interested in every last detail, the boss will go for the $2500 camera that looks "good enough" almost every time. And, to be honest, it really does almost every time.
A good example is if it's going to be in a magazine. Most clients want roughly 300dpi optical equivalent at best(similar to dye-sub@300dpi). Given that with framing and borders and so on, you're looking at a realistic 8x10 for even a full page ad - maybe closer to 7x8 if it's positioned horizontally and has copy above or below it. Even at 400dpi 25MP is just overkill by the time it hits the actual page. A Sony A850/900 will be closer to 500dpi. Plainly overkill.
**from the adobe cs2 manual/help file**
Newspaper Ad (65-85 lpi) 130 - 170 ppi
Average Magazine & Brochure (133 lpi) 200 - 266 ppi
High End Magazine & Brochure (150 lpi) 225 - 300 ppi
Annual Report (177 lpi) 265 - 350 ppi
Fine Art & Coffee Table Books (200 lpi) 300 - 400 ppi
****
Specs on the A850/A900
• 6048 x 4032 (24M 3:2) - 11X17 is roughly(due to the 3:2 aspect ratio): (200X1.666X11)X(200X1.666X17) - 3666X5666, or 20MP - and that's rarely used, if ever, since actual printed materials tend to max out at 200LPI for most non-specialized things. The 1.666 is to convert, roughly, for the Bayer pattern's effect on the LPI printed versus digital in both dimensions. 24.6MP is more than your client will likely ever use.
Essentially these tools are all overkill - just take the shot, submit the result after you've cleaned it up/tweaked with it in raw, and let them deal with the rest.
The client doesn't care. They want their image to stick in their magazine or catalog and you could do that with any of these higher-end cameras. So limiting this part of the forum to one type of camera when they all are pretty much well beyond what's required for an actual job is silly.
Perhaps a better change, then, would be to have a "professional/high-end photography(20mp+)" label? This would cover the high-end stuff while leaving the consumer cameras and discussions in their own area.
[/size]
-
?!?!
A disappointing remark, IMHO.
A number of contributors to this forum write about equipment they actually own, .......
I guess I didn't communicate well, but I'm not denigrating what camera anyone uses, or believe any discussion should be limited.
In fact I'm impressed greatly with the people that still shoot photojournalism on 4x5 film, or fashion with a point and shoot casio. To me that's interesting.
I actually think that using a 6x6 Rolliflex is interesting, though more so with film than the standard 645 frame.
Personally I am brand/format agnostic.
My point was if this section of the forum is going to be limited to talk about a certain sized format equipment, might as well limit it to what is sold and available today.
Personally I don't believe any discussion should be limited and I do wish in the digital domain there were more real options beyond a 645 or 35mm frame and when I look around it seems the real innovation is coming from the 4:3's camera makers, but to keep up with those users I have to flip to some other section of the forum and I'm not sure what section that would even fall under.
BC
-
I don't have a problem with this forum posting about med format digital with the occasional posting about the higher end dslr's. I likes the architectural test with the DSLR.Med lens test. It would just be nice to edit out all the crap from people who just want to say my camera is better then your camera. From past posting people started posting snap shot of pet dogs and friends, and had no clue about high quality images. The med format forum should stay on topic regarding the best of the best. I personally stopped reading this post after the first page, it was to redundant, just like my post is redundant.
As per the dealers and manufactures is another topic. It really bothers me that manufacture edit what they want to respond to and ignore people like me who have legitimate problems with their products. I feel a certain name on here never addresses real issues. Even though I think med is better for what I shoot, I will not reinvest with these companies.
-
One of the reasons this Medium format + digital backs forum is so popular - apart from it's highly appreciated contributors (you know who you are) : medium format "isn't there yet"
We've waited for years to have 35mm where it should be: swift capturing full size sensors, high iso and 21+ mp.
MF on the other hand, even at 65mp isn't. I wouldn't say MF should be limited to 20+, just because current clients need no more. To be able to produce unlimited quality, one should at least capture in megapixels what the lenses allow.
I have to disagree. Art and similar uses are great, but the vast majority of people don't spend tens of thousands on these high-end cameras and accessories to just use as a hobby. The issue is that in the last few years consumer-level cameras have improved to where there's significant bleed-over between what used to be two clearly defined formats. As such, that only leaves the intended use as a way to differentiate between the two. MP beyond a certain point is meaningless, since nobody who is paying you money cares at this stage in the game. They want it fast and "good enough" more than 90% of the time. The other 10%(running your own photo studio and making your own framed pictures comes to mind) is still there as well, but it's not what the majority of MF users are using it for. I chose 20MP as a dividing line, since that's essentially 645 format if you scanned film.
And what happens if Canon comes out with a MkV some day that has a 40MP sensor with no AA filter for $5K? Does some sort of hole open in the universe and the Earth gets sucked in?
-
But think about those the shoot landscape (me) I make good money to pay for my equipments, in no one tell me what to do.
Between DSLR and MF is like night in day. No way the anyone the shoot with MF will ever shot landscape with dslr.
Another take on it:
http://jimrichardson.typepad.com/richardso...e-no-10525.html (http://jimrichardson.typepad.com/richardson_photography/2009/12/edge-of-the-world-frame-no-10525.html)
And then, the resulting images. Obviously, half-ass quality with this Nikon camera:
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/01/...son-photography (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/01/hebrides/richardson-photography)
But of course, you *do* have the Magical Glowing Rocks in your image, that clearly, only MF could render so magically:
http://www.bmrworldphotos.com/ (http://www.bmrworldphotos.com/)
-
Another take on it:
http://jimrichardson.typepad.com/richardso...e-no-10525.html (http://jimrichardson.typepad.com/richardson_photography/2009/12/edge-of-the-world-frame-no-10525.html)
And then, the resulting images. Obviously, half-ass quality with this Nikon camera:
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/01/...son-photography (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/01/hebrides/richardson-photography)
But of course, you *do* have the Magical Glowing Rocks in your image, that clearly, only MF could render so magically:
http://www.bmrworldphotos.com/ (http://www.bmrworldphotos.com/)
Ya, I'm not going to spend a day to sale print for.
Prices
Size Unframed Framed
10'' $19.95 $129.00
14'' $34.95 $159.00
20'' $49.95 $200.00
30'' $89.95 $275.00
if a bear eat me, then what? my wife will get married again, in the other man will enjoy my money.
one more in finally time. if you shot with a dslr in then with mf will be like night in day, you like it or not.
I need drink, I love what i have, i guess is good to be rich
I sold almost all my canon, I have only the 70-200 and the 400 do between those two will be around 7,000.00
the only two photos i sold from my canon was this two.
with p25 got all my money+ more to keep drinking, with p45+ more then more and more drinking
with h3d-50 i'm braking almost even, ( because some one say if i work hard i need to share with those don't like to work)
so I just enjoying in see if in 3 more years I can work hard in keep my cash in drink little be more.
oh hold I'd been to the 50 state of usa. almost all europe, asia (almost every were too), centro america from colombia to mexico,in all between, middle east, caribean in more and more. wow what a great life. i need more drink love it
but i was my boss (well my wife order me around) here are those shots.
the boat was sold 201 to the marriott in boston. but didn't pay for the 1ds. so MF will be the best. the birds, (bosque del apache) 32 times
were in the hell is my f™¡£¢∞§•ªºµ√ç≈∂≈Ωåœ÷æ‘ drink
-
with p25 got all my money+ more to keep drinking, with p45+ more then more and more drinking
Best post ever on this board.
So there you have it, boys and girls -- the REAL reason to shoot medium format.
-
Best post ever on this board.
So there you have it, boys and girls -- the REAL reason to shoot medium format.
This post has made my New Year. Or has April 1st come early......
-
Different 'tools' in action.
http://www.eternalmoonwalk.com/ (http://www.eternalmoonwalk.com/)
Mark
www.marktomalty.com
-
Well, I will risk disagreeing with Lisa. I think that separating this forum into forums grouped by photography type would kill them all. I like reading this forum for the variety.
I don't think so.
Either way, there is a form of separation.
What we are looking for is the separation that is most relevant to what we do. The fact of the matter is that most of us have a speciality, and can use different tools to serve the needs of that speciality, in my case landscape photography.
Spending 80% of my time in a landscape section wouldn't prevent me from looking elsewhere if I need to.
One thing is highly disturbing with the current MF forum, there is a certain feeling outthere that high end photography is done with high end gear because high end photography requires the best and therefore the most expensive, in the present case MF digital.
I personnally believe that this assumption is wrong at at leats 2 levels:
- high end photography doesn't require high image quality from a technical standpoint,
- the highest image quality can be achieved with reasonnably affordable equipment (think stitching).
Having subject separation by usage and not by equipment would avoid the current association between money and quality photography by centering the debate on what really matters: how to achieve high quality results for a given type of applications.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
seems like a lot of people here print 30x40s...all the time...in 20 years of shooting and working, i have yet to print one..the largest i have seen my work is mag covers blown up to 3x5ft...and in all those prints (non inkjet) i have not seen a difference between a file from scan, digital p&s or DMF....
so why don't we call/arrange the forums by print sizes....up to 11x14....and must see the ant's crack in my 30x40 print....
-
*yawn*
-
*yawn*
+1
-
What we are looking for is the separation that is most relevant to what we do. The fact of the matter is that most of us have a speciality, and can use different tools to serve the needs of that speciality, in my case landscape photography.
...centering the debate on what really matters: how to achieve high quality results for a given type of applications.
Cheers,
Bernard
Exactly my sentiments.
-
Very exciting article.
http://www.harlanerskine.com/blog/2010/01/...weetchat-s.html (http://www.harlanerskine.com/blog/2010/01/tonight-tuesdays-photo-art-tweetchat-s.html)
-
I dont post here much any more because my D3 and Hassy/22p have worked fine and pleased my clients for years now - really Ive become disinterested in camera tech - which is great
I agree. It is great. Disinterested is the only way to be when comparing camera technical qualities.
If you are not disinterested, your results and comparisons are worthless.
This is what really annoys me about camera and format comparisons. There's often a lack of disinterest. There's often so much bias and 'pushing one's own barrow'.
Whatever you do, try to be as disinterested as possible when comparing the technical performance of cameras.
-
I agree. It is great. Disinterested is the only way to be when comparing camera technical qualities.
If you are not disinterested, your results and comparisons are worthless.
This is what really annoys me about camera and format comparisons. There's often a lack of disinterest. There's often so much bias and 'pushing one's own barrow'.
Whatever you do, try to be as disinterested as possible when comparing the technical performance of cameras.
I think most selfd respecting pro's have to be. ....
If they want improved gear...or improve in anything period.
If all you have eaten is your French onion soup, and you LOVE it, how can you serve people that same soup without trying others LOVED soup and seeing if there are charactoristics in it that actually make sense to switch out? (hope that loose analogy works)
-
(hope that loose analogy works)
Works for me and always have!
-
I don't think that there are signs that anyone has left, apart from James Russell
No disrespect to James' work, knowledge or real world professionalism, but he's flounced off here numourous times before - I find it all a little bit primadonna-ish, tbh.
-
No disrespect to James' work, knowledge or real world professionalism, but he's flounced off here numourous times before - I find it all a little bit primadonna-ish, tbh.
Mr Cooter is making sure that we do not miss the gentleman, by posting his website link on the signature.....
-
Doesn't anybody think the guy might actually have something gainful to do? I don't think he flounces.
To be honest, he's one of the few pros here that I find very interesting to read and whose work I admire. The other major attraction (for me) is the Motown shooter with the huge talent and access to wet dream machines. I speak of cars, you understand.
Rob C