Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: RomainVaucher on July 31, 2010, 10:32:47 am
-
Hi,
I love using medium format but using it with a digital back outdoor has not been really good for me. I struggle a lot shooting outdoor with the digital back. I do very fine either with film or the nikon.
Do you think it could be because of the back I am using (H20) or does digital backs have a different use outdoor that I do not have figured out yet ?
R.
-
You don't tell us what the problem that you are having might be. Explain the issue and maybe done can help.
Michael
-
Oh sry.
Colors are flat, images look dull, It just doesnt look as crisp as film when shooting the same scene w/ same lighting.
When shooting in the studio, it is not this way, that's why I ask.
-
Hi,
I love using medium format but using it with a digital back outdoor has not been really good for me. I struggle a lot shooting outdoor with the digital back. I do very fine either with film or the nikon.
Do you think it could be because of the back I am using (H20) or does digital backs have a different use outdoor that I do not have figured out yet ?
Colors are flat, images look dull, It just doesnt look as crisp as film when shooting the same scene w/ same lighting.
When shooting in the studio, it is not this way, that's why I ask.
R.
¿Which Nikon are you using?
¿What MF film are you comparing it with?
¿What ISO are you using?
¿Are you using a tripod?
¿How are you setting the White Balance?
¿Are you getting the max out of you images in post?
I would have thought that an H20 should be comparable with a Nikon or MF film
I think that the way to take a good outdoor shot is to take as much trouble with it as you would a studio shot... and yes, I think it is more critical with MFD.
-
I think that the way to take a good outdoor shot is to take as much trouble with it as you would a studio shot... and yes, I think it is more critical with MFD.
I agree with this. When you say "outdoor" are you talking about landscapes?
The chances that a specific landscape is ready to be photographed when you arrive is very slim. It takes a lot of planning,waiting, and revisiting to capture one correctly. You don't have nearly the same control as you do in a studio.
-
¿Which Nikon are you using?
¿What MF film are you comparing it with?
¿What ISO are you using?
¿Are you using a tripod?
¿How are you setting the White Balance?
¿Are you getting the max out of you images in post?
I would have thought that an H20 should be comparable with a Nikon or MF film
I think that the way to take a good outdoor shot is to take as much trouble with it as you would a studio shot... and yes, I think it is more critical with MFD.
- Nikon D700
- Velvia 100
- ISO 100
- Yes
- Grey card
- I was talking about images straight out the camera but I think there could lie the problem.
I agree with this. When you say "outdoor" are you talking about landscapes?
The chances that a specific landscape is ready to be photographed when you arrive is very slim. It takes a lot of planning,waiting, and revisiting to capture one correctly. You don't have nearly the same control as you do in a studio.
No, no landscape. Fashion shots.
-
You definitely must be doing something wrong or the thing is broken. If I have a look at files I took years ago outside with my Leaf Valeo11 they still look better than the ones I take today with the D700. Not by much but a visible difference. The D700 is much more convenient to use than the Digiflex II with the Valeo11 and the external disk (even while leaving the Ipaq at home).
The H20 is a slightly newer back than the Valeo11 and I have little doubt it should produce excellent results outside as well. If it is not, it is either broken or you are doing things the wrong way. Again, the D700 produces very nice results in a much more convenient way than the generation of backs without LCD and CF storage.
-
which software are you using to develop the H20 files?
-
Romain
With the Hasselblad 3FR files, for them to look good "straight out of the camera" you will need to use Phocus as your RAW converter. Otherwise, as you say, they will look flat, with poor colour and be lacking in punch.
You can use ACR, Lightroom, Aperture or whatever, but then you will need to create a basic camera profile which emulates the job the Phocus does when it converts the 3FR fies to FFF.
If you are already using Phocus, then I am not sure what to suggest.
John
-
If you are already using Phocus, then I am not sure what to suggest.
I would suggest using Capture One then... I thought the H20 is a Phase One DB...
-
Oh dear
I saw the "H" and just thought "Hasselblad". Silly me
Still, jolly useful post if it had been a Hasselbad, eh?
John
-
Romain it looks like a bisic setup inside the back. Go through all the options of choosing a preset that might bring you closer to wher you want to be.
Then get a set up in your raw developer to automatically tune the files like you want them to be.
Check too that the exposure you are making is as correct as you need it to be. The back may be rated at a slower iso than you thought.
There have been many happy shooters with the H20 and surely the result must be better than dslr you have by quite far...
-
Romain check this out and the part concerning the software.
http://www.imaginginfo.com/print/Studio-Ph...ack/3$1147 (http://www.imaginginfo.com/print/Studio-Photography/Phase-Ones-LightPhase-H20-Digital-Back/3$1147)
Hope it helps you.
-
I think the problem here is one of expectation.
In the past I selected film emulsion to match my vision, what came out of the camera was more often than not the finalised image. These days I prefer to start from a neutral standpoint - RAW file - rather than a pre-determined and imposed emulsion.
I suspect your expectation is that your un-processed digital files should match your Velvia transparencies; it ain't going to happen.
EDIT: I should add that there is a vast difference between big fat light in the studio and the ever changing subtleties of natural light.
Hi Keith
I think you used to utilise one of those Hasselblad cameras with a form of 'movement' - arcbody(?) or something like that. What do you use with your digital 'blad to achieve the effect of movements? If, of course, you need to so do.
Rob C
-
Rob, yes, I used the ArcBody for a number of years. At the moment I've no use for movements, but should I need them in the future I'll either use the Hasselblad HTS or my digital back in combination with a tech/view camera.
Keith
I still have my Flexbody (which uses the standard Hassy lenses, as opposed to the special lenses you had to use with the ArcBody)... Unfortunately it is not compatible with the H3/4, but I hope to acquire a V sys compatible digiback sometime...
-
I was in boston the other day and I saw someone shooting people coming out of the front door of a store on boylston. looked like a mamiya zd with a 150-ish lens and 2 flashes connected to the thing. I couldn't see the brand for real cause the person had everything taped up on it.
-
I was in boston the other day and I saw someone shooting people coming out of the front door of a store on boylston. looked like a mamiya zd with a 150-ish lens and 2 flashes connected to the thing. I couldn't see the brand for real cause the person had everything taped up on it.
thats a really nice story...
-
thats a really nice story...
Yea. i was l wondering about this earlier. I thought maybe I should post about some current events in the world.
-
Ok. I think it was more of a expectation problem on my H20. I tried a P25 yesterday and the files are WAY better after being processed. I tried it with the guy from P1, and he explained me a bit which has helped a lot !
-
Yea. i was l wondering about this earlier. I thought maybe I should post about some current events in the world.
Speaking of which I saw some people in tokyo today who were not even trying to take pictures.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Yea. i was l wondering about this earlier. I thought maybe I should post about some current events in the world.
Mrs President is in Marbella - that's current. Has anyone thought about the 'O' thing? You know, the Jackie O chain in presidential wives. Oh, never mind; it's a European thing, but might come in useful for the bets in the next forecasts...
Rob C