Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Martin Kristiansen on December 06, 2011, 09:01:59 am
-
Started with a Kodak DCS420 in 1996. Dreadful little sensor and the race was on to find ways to improve image quality. Over the years stitching was introduced, HDR made its dramatic appearance and now we have focus stacking as well.
It seems somedays that I can shoot 40 images that then need to be stitched, stacked and tone mapped to produce something worth looking at. In the mean time pixel count has gone through the roof and now I realize I no longer need to or care to do all this stuff to produce an image I like.
Cut to 2011 and I have been shooting with the Aptus12R on a Cambo Ultima. In 9 months I have not done a single stitch, HDR or focus stack. If it doesn't work out the camera I chuck it. I am loving photography again.
Anyone else have these have this experience? Any other opinions on these work flows that I find over complicated.
-
Still lovin' the magic of straight photography and shooting full frame.
-
Started with a Kodak DCS420 in 1996. Dreadful little sensor and the race was on to find ways to improve image quality. Over the years stitching was introduced, HDR made its dramatic appearance and now we have focus stacking as well.
It seems somedays that I can shoot 40 images that then need to be stitched, stacked and tone mapped to produce something worth looking at. In the mean time pixel count has gone through the roof and now I realize I no longer need to or care to do all this stuff to produce an image I like.
Cut to 2011 and I have been shooting with the Aptus12R on a Cambo Ultima. In 9 months I have not done a single stitch, HDR or focus stack. If it doesn't work out the camera I chuck it. I am loving photography again.
Anyone else have these have this experience? Any other opinions on these work flows that I find over complicated.
Indeed my AFi-II 12 (same as Aptus12R) has brought me back to the basis of photography. It is more than the pixels and in the sheer image quality. It has made me ditch film, which rendering I prior not been able let go alongside digital. Now down from five camera systems the Hy6 with just two lenses keeps me happy. It is about photography and not gear. Processing is simple and enables a rendering of light in images, unlike any digital I shot before and my prior 28MP Leaf included.
Indeed I agree. :)
Best regards
Anders
-
Hi Anders,
Nice to hear that you finally found happiness with digital. Can you describe the differences between your AFi-II 12 and your 28 MP Leaf? Are you using same raw converter with both cameras?
Best regards
Erik
Indeed my AFi-II 12 (same as Aptus12R) has brought me back to the basis of photography. It is more than the pixels and in the sheer image quality. It has made me ditch film, which rendering I prior not been able let go alongside digital. Now down from five camera systems the Hy6 with just two lenses keeps me happy. It is about photography and not gear. Processing is simple and enables a rendering of light in images, unlike any digital I shot before and my prior 28MP Leaf included.
Indeed I agree. :)
Best regards
Anders
-
Not me. The results are more than worth the extra time spent in front of the monitor.
I've recently increased my post production time several fold due to my current insistence on using just one lens on my D300. My mid-seventies vintage 55mm F3.5 Micro Nikkor has opened my eyes to what my ancient cameras and "computational photography" can accomplish.
The lens' narrow field of view requires stitching, its astounding sharpness requires focus stacking and many landscapes require HDR bracketing. So, for a typical landscape (if there is such a thing) I may record upwards of two dozen frames - all of which need processing.
Of course, I'm no longer in this game for the money - I'm in it for the grins.
Besides: "Wintertime is Photoshop time" : )
-
Not me. The results are more than worth the extra time spent in front of the monitor.
I've recently increased my post production time several fold due to my current insistence on using just one lens on my D300. My mid-seventies vintage 55mm F3.5 Micro Nikkor has opened my eyes to what my ancient cameras and "computational photography" can accomplish.
The lens' narrow field of view requires stitching, its astounding sharpness requires focus stacking and many landscapes require HDR bracketing. So, for a typical landscape (if there is such a thing) I may record upwards of two dozen frames - all of which need processing.
I think the question is would you be happier if you could afford to buy (and your other requirements were met by) a system like an P65+ on a Cambo RS and you could replace focus stacking with in-camera lens-tilt, HDR bracketing by higher dynamic range, and stitching by a higher resolution single-frame capture and a wide tact-sharp Schneider lens - would you miss the post processing?
In other words do you do said post-processing because you enjoy the post processing or do you do it because it's a necessary evil?
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) ([email protected])
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/") | RSS Feed (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
-
It comes down to photographer types. There are those who enjoy shooting, those who like darkrooms and those who enjoy getting spinal curvature at the computer.
It could well be further influenced by your background in photography. If you've been mainly a studio/still life kind of person, then you will be accustomed to slow and deliberate working; if you have done a lot of architecture, mainstream advertising or industrial stuff, then it's probably much the same there. But, if you've been into people, sport or travel, then I suspect the post-camera process moments are mainly considered as Doug's 'necessary evil' and something that gets in the way of the parts of photography that make you want to be in the business.
I have to admit, thought I did a lot of my early work in b/w and all of that processing myself, life became far more enjoyable when I managed to reach a point where it was almost all Kodachrome or Ektachrome.
It was also very nice to know that once you'd handed over good transparencies, it was time to send in the bill and forget all about the job and look at the next. I just can't understand anyone wanting to get involved beyond the shooting or design of the photographs. Who needs added stress?
I speak from the basis of having done exactly that: first just shooting to order, and then getting into design and taking stuff through print; there, you run into the problems associated with other suppliers' ideas of quality and, that dreaded phrase, what's 'commercially acceptable'.
Rob C
-
Hi Anders,
Nice to hear that you finally found happiness with digital. Can you describe the differences between your AFi-II 12 and your 28 MP Leaf? Are you using same raw converter with both cameras?
Best regards
Erik
Hi Erik,
It is about what media works, digital or not is not important. Film and in particular Fuji Velvia 50 are excellent photographic medias and I still really much like Velvia. Perhaps my eye is sensitive to color and rendering in an image, but why should it not be? My prior Leaf Aptus 65 (28MP) was the best digital tool I had used but failed to bring me some of what Velvia brought. Selling nearly all of my five camera systems financed the upgrade to AFi-II 12. While I knew pixels were more and specific parameters of the image quality would be improved, it was nevertheless a $$ gamble "investing" in it. I simply also wanted more focus on photography using less gear, simply because I am fed up on being sold "new, better" gear and carrying much gear. The AFi-II 12 unexpectedly made me premature stop shooting 4x5 and sell my last stock of Velvia Quickloads (those are no longer made). Keeping my Shen-Hao 4x5 camera though because I simply like it (though no film to shoot it...).
Yes, of course I use Capture One for AFi-II 12 as I also used for Aptus 65. Compared to Aptus 65, the AFi-II 12 (80MP vs. 28MP) brings first and foremost better and more correct colors, a finer gradation of colors (more shades), a broader DR and a better highlight to shadow response. Looking at also the AFi-II 10, the 10 appears to have evolutionary improvements in image quality over my Aptus 65, but the AFi-II 12 had clear more significant improvements. It is about more than the 50 vs. 28 and 80 vs. 28MP. In a way I can now also equal the response of AFi-12 from mid tone to highlights to that of slide film, and there are more stops more of shadow information available compared to slide film. I can of course control more in post using Capture One than I could with slide film. The slide film was pre-programmed per say. Yet the results I get also with scenes having bright light such as early morning or sunset sun in small part of the image are far better than any digital I used. That was one area where I liked slide film, in that it had a pleasing highlight transition. With the AFi-II 12 I can afford to expose to permit for a similar highlight response using curves in post. There is also little need for HDR which I always found unnatural and a waste anyways.
And yes, the more pixels must help in all the above, but the larger real estate of details is also a resource for landscapes. The 80MP do require holding camera very steady at exposure. That is one reason to why I am pleased also with the Hy6 system. Because it has a waist level finder it keeps me from lifting the camera to eye level which requires more strength to hold steady. Instead I can cradle the camera with both arms and am thus able to hold it steady at slower shutter speeds. And a waist level finder is one step closer towards being a groundglass...
I find the waist level finder and controls of the Hy6 are photographically superior to the Mamiya system. It helps me view the image better and with a photographic brain control the image without technology being in the way. The AF is more precise than Mamiya AFDIII and manual focus is a breeze with the focus confirmation which is simple to use.
It comes down to photographer types. There are those who enjoy shooting, those who like darkrooms and those who enjoy getting spinal curvature at the computer.
It could well be further influenced by your background in photography. If you've been mainly a studio/still life kind of person, then you will be accustomed to slow and deliberate working; if you have done a lot of architecture, mainstream advertising or industrial stuff, then it's probably much the same there. But, if you've been into people, sport or travel, then I suspect the post-camera process moments are mainly considered as Doug's 'necessary evil' and something that gets in the way of the parts of photography that make you want to be in the business.
Rob,
In my view, in the end it comes down to the image. This at least is why I like photography. All other steps need to be taken with the goal to arrive at the image. If the digital darkroom was my idea of "fun" my interest would not be photography. Same as Ansel Adams we need to control all steps of the photographic process. Admittedly it takes the right tool for us to feel content at making an image per say.
I like slow and deliberate. That gives me better images. Same time, why waste time with HDR or stitching when we do not have to? The slow and deliberate that I like is at capture which aids be in arriving at an image per how I best visualize a scene prior to the capture, thus with the mind on the image. From there on I prefer the shortest path that yields the image as I pre-visualized. This is also why I use Capture One and do not use Photoshop, since Capture One lends me a more photographic process and allows me to think photographically and maintain matters simple.
I am keen to get an Alpa eventually for panoramic stitching, because it is a different format and can enable large format panoramas in digital. No, I do not like rotating camera instead.
Albeit as you say, we are all tad different photographer types.
Best regards
Anders
-
In other words do you do said post-processing because you enjoy the post processing or do you do it because it's a necessary evil?
A good question, Doug.
There's no doubt it's a necessary evil, just as mixing, pouring, measuring and cleaning were a necessarily evil part of our chemical photography days. At least the computer room is bright, quiet and doesn't smell like hypo.
There's no doubt that I'm trading monitor time for money not spent on a more capable MFD system.
So far, the trade's been worth it. But then again, I've never shot such a system.
-
I agree with much of what you san Anders. Slow and deliberate. When I go out shooting for myself I can be busy all day. What put me off was the amount of work that backed up in post as a consequence. Changing the way I work means that all day shooting nets me only a half dozen final images that are likely to be printed and no more than 15 minutes to half an hour to get a file print ready.
I am very busy commercially, its how I can buy MFDB equipment, and have tried to put a week a month aside to work on personal projects. While I can usually achieve this goal I often return to the studio with a tremendous commercial work load. I simply do not have another free week available to do intensive image processing and anyway find I enjoy it less and less.
The Aptus 12 supplies an image that prints to 1.2m wide with no effort and this is a good size for how I see. Cropping I have never been a fan of from back in my film days. My work flow has been refined and automated as much as possible. I use PK sharpen for all my sharpening. I print using Imageprint rip, it saves time and trouble and I like the results. My camera has been profiled using DNG profile editor and I shoot using daylight colour balance, not auto. It is as close to shooting film as I can get. I also always shoot a lens cal file as that removes a lot of manual labour using tilts, swings and shifts on the Cambo.
All the above allows me to focus on what I want to say. I am in no way denigrating other more intensive image editing work flows. I was merely curious if any other photographers were coming full circle on this issue particularly with the arrival of the new high megapixel count backs.
Thanks for your posts Anders.
-
Hi,
In my humble view there are two discussions. One is about processing the images the other one how much processing the images need?
Like Anders I was shooting Velvia on MF for a long time. I guess that I was one of the first Velvia users as I desperately looked for an alternative to Kodachrome after Kodakchrome processing went horrible in Sweden.
Now, Velvia is a film with very odd characteristics, it has been developed for landscape photographers, among other things it has totally unacceptable color on European skin. So it could be said that Velvia has "a fixed processing built in".
A digital back is essentially a device collecting info. It's natural for the back to deliver three very flat gray images. One for "green", "red" and "blue". The three image are really combined in one. The color arises in processing. The back it self does contribute to the color, as the color filters separating the three color may have different spectral characteristics in the backs. A back with steeper color characteristic and less noise may produce better color.
But as said, the color and tonality arises in post processing. Some tools and combination of tools may be better than others.
My understanding is that Anders feels that his new back produces the images he wants with little tweaking. Some of us like tweaking with the images, some don't.
Only in reproduction work do we really want accurate color. In real life photography we normally want "pleasant color" and the definition of pleasant color varies eye to eye, brain to brain. MFDB vendors need to care for all needs, but software, color profiles for different styles of photography and different characteristics of light can go a long way to help users achieving what they are striving for.
Best regards
Erik
A good question, Doug.
There's no doubt it's a necessary evil, just as mixing, pouring, measuring and cleaning were a necessarily evil part of our chemical photography days. At least the computer room is bright, quiet and doesn't smell like hypo.
There's no doubt that I'm trading monitor time for money not spent on a more capable MFD system.
So far, the trade's been worth it. But then again, I've never shot such a system.
-
I enjoy the potential of post-processing, but not how long it takes.
-
I enjoy the potential of post-processing, but not how long it takes.
Exact. With a better file to start with, it is a shorter path!
@ Erik, Profiles, default colors etc in Capture One are by Leaf... :)
-
Yes I know that Capture One has many different profiles, that is the reason I mentioned it.
BR
Erik
Exact. With a better file to start with, it is a shorter path!
@ Erik, Profiles, default colors etc in Capture One are by Leaf... :)
-
For me, things have changed in digital photography especially since any work requiring a post-production can be expected during the shooting. We can often provide multiple files knowing beforehand how much they are likely to be very useful in being involved. Previously, some transparencies went to the customer, the advertising agency, the retoucher, the photoengraver and the printer. Some time later, I sometimes get to see the printed document in a folder, a magazine, a poster. And sometimes there was a real disaster: the white or black cardboard placed in the background to control a particular reflection, this clip, etc... found themselves visible on the printout.
Today, photographers are much more responsible for the finished product. Economically, some levels have disappeared (lab, photoingraving, etc ...) without significant financial benefits for photographers. Personally, I gained a lot more money for each shot twenty years ago than today. But now I realize significantly more shots!
That said, what about this conversation would have found a better place in the "professional photographers" as in that specific large format and digital MF. This issue affects all areas of professional digital photography.
PdF
-
Now down from five camera systems the Hy6 with just two lenses keeps me happy.
Best regards
Anders
2 lenses only? I have 5 for the Hy6 and wouldn´t want to miss a single one of them. Which two lenses do you have?
-
I preferred post-processing Velvia (before DIY scanning) - there was none!
Bingo!
Rob C
-
I preferred post-processing Velvia (before DIY scanning) - there was none!
Quite right unless of course you happened to do your own processing or work in a large photolab as I did.
I dont mind some work in post. It gives time to think and assess but I dont like it when I feel that the moment of creation has moved into post. I was not fond of negatives that had to be beaten into shape in the darkroom either.
-
I think image processing possibilities should be a positive influence in the field. It opens up our pre-visualization eyes to more possibilities. However, this tendency needs to be filtered to prevent dozens of shots and hours of computer time to create an image. Personally I have several months of computer processing time on backlogged images to process from 2011! After several weeks of this type of work, I start to lose the creative excitement of attacking yet another new image. That can't be good.
The new tools should open our eyes to new creative possibilities, but now we need to help each other find ways to accomplish those visions most efficiently - with maybe fewer shots and creative, efficient methods in the digital darkroom.
We're like kids in a candy store and don't know when to stop eating! Personally, I don't want the new tools to become so cumbersome to kill the spontaneous joy of photography.
Thanks for bringing up the issue!!
-
For the most part, how hard or time consuming is post processing? Perhaps a contrast change or a little sharpening, but I am not spending hours on an image, probably less than a minute, no more than two on average. Now, if I had a couple of hundred wedding photographs, that is significant time, but just casual shooing for myself, it is not laborious. It actually lets me enjoy the image somewhat.
-
2 lenses only? I have 5 for the Hy6 and wouldn´t want to miss a single one of them. Which two lenses do you have?
80/2.8 Xenotar PQ AFD --- best lens I ever owned. Lovely character.
50 Distagon FLE
As an advanced amateur I am unsure if I need any more. It keeps matters simple, and breeze for carrying around. ;)
-
I barely read the OP's initial comments, and didn't read any of the other comments. I think that all that matters is the end result, however you get there. Cartier-Bresson claimed to know nothing about photography. Ansel Adams seemed to know everything about photography. I don't care. I just want to see the results.
-
I barely read the OP's initial comments, and didn't read any of the other comments. I think that all that matters is the end result, however you get there. Cartier-Bresson claimed to know nothing about photography. Ansel Adams seemed to know everything about photography. I don't care. I just want to see the results.
If you had read the post and the comments you would have noticed that this is not about criticism of individual workflows but a discussion to determine how much post people are happy to do. I find heavy computer work tedious for example.
No one has said anything negative about lots of post other than not wanting to personally spend hours in front of a monitor. Others are happy with a lot of computer work
I agree that all that matters is the result but this thread was never about that
-
Hi,
It was always the way that making the best of an image involved a lot of work. In darkroom times we burned and dodged. Many pictures need extensive processing, even if color coming out of the camera is OK.
The camera cannot know what colors and rendering are on your mind. The camera is not intended to reproduce colors faithfully. Such a camera would be good for reproduction but little else. If you shoot raw the color processing is done in the raw processor. If you are satisfied with the defaults, you probably miss a lot.
Best regards
Erik
If you had read the post and the comments you would have noticed that this is not about criticism of individual workflows but a discussion to determine how much post people are happy to do. I find heavy computer work tedious for example.
No one has said anything negative about lots of post other than not wanting to personally spend hours in front of a monitor. Others are happy with a lot of computer work
I agree that all that matters is the result but this thread was never about that
-
Just like I liked spending time with my 4x5 camera, I like stitching as it slows down my work and helps me produce better images.
The time required to generate prefect stitching is in the range of a few minutes these days with the latest versions of PTGui or Autopano pro and pretty trivial compared to the time spent in PS on most images (either single or stitches).
In terms of quality, stitching takes you a step higher, just like 4x5 used to be. It is up to each of us to decide how good is good enough, but I would not consider current output medium as being the end of the road. 80MP will seem low in 10 years from now. :-)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I feel like this sometimes. One landscape shot is often 20+ frames after accounting for focus stacking, stitching and exposure blending and the total time inc. post makes large format look fast.
-
Seems I'm going to buck the trend and say that I actually like it. Of corse there are times where I want to get away from it when I'm buried under a tonne of jobs but need to motor through it but for me it's a big part of the image making and creative process...i really enjoy it and while I've tried getting other people to do it I've never once been happy with the results and it's just easier, quicker and better time if I do it my self. I don't have the ability to miss deadlines when the retoucher hasn't completed it or done it right needing to do it again.
It's a skill I've developed over a long time and that is very valuable. I've developed procedures and techniques that are unique to me and my work and that is even more valuable as it differentiates me from the next person. But on the other hand I only get 4 hours of sleep a night mostly 7 days w week. But it's really by choice. Still after close to 2 decades it doesn't feel like work. It has made me indispensable with my clients. If something goes wrong outside of the teams ability to plan for it then I know I can fix anything. There has never been a time that it hasn't worked.
Most of my computer work on an image is spent working the colour, tonality, of an image. Massaging the tones. I'm actually retouching less than I used to since my capture and lighting skills and gear has improved over the years and also as the jobs get better and the models get better, there's more organisation on shoot day, so less to "fix" later on. I am a stickler for getting it done in camera. Regardless of it it being easier or not, as a professional, a craftsman and an artisan that's your job to do it in camera at shoot time.
Generally I can't step away from it until it's right. It's never perfect though which is an ongoing source of angst. :) My favourite quote is a Michelangelo one (I believe). Something along the lines of "you don't finish a work of art you merely abandon it". Rings very true for me.
If I ever catch myself complaining I remember all those years I spent struggling to get work and I shut tf up, be thankful and enjoy the ride. I'm probably going to take someone on to do the general cleaning, skin work etc but to give it up is to me giving up the reason I fell in love with photography and fell in love with the image making process.
Lastly the computer hasn't changed anything. I remember the early days or doing it in the darkroom. Processing, proofing, spending a whole night on a print and blowing a whole box of paper just to get it perfect, spotting a neg Then spending a weekend toning, bleaching, working and finishing the print. I used to love painting but liked the immediacy of photography. Maybe it would just be quicker to return to painting!
-
There is much talk here of the past, and about Ektachrome or Fujichrome sheets. Do you remember Pola 55 and multiple tests that were conducted during the progress of the implementation of the lighting in the studio or outside ? We tried to waste as little as possible, because this was big budget. How many Polas before saying "OK, we shoot it!"?. And how long (after trips to the lab) to see an ekta with the magnifier and say "OK, this one is the best"?
PdF
-
There is much talk here of the past, and about Ektachrome or Fujichrome sheets. Do you remember Pola 55 and multiple tests that were conducted during the progress of the implementation of the lighting in the studio or outside ? We tried to waste as little as possible, because this was big budget. How many Polas before saying "OK, we shoot it!"?. And how long (after trips to the lab) to see an ekta with the magnifier and say "OK, this one is the best"?
PdF
I remember it well. It doesnt seem so long ago. The shoots took longer but once it was done we all went home. Now we process.
Just to be clear I have very different work flows with my commercial work and private work. With commercial work there is a lot of retouching and deep etching. The workload is getting less as the equipment improves but I still employ people to handle this end of things. One very good person in particular With my private work I do it all myself and that is the area where I have decided not do do HDR, focus stacking and stitching. Well sometimes I still stitch but not as often. 80MP reduces the need for stitching somewhat.
-
No one has said anything negative about lots of post other than not wanting to personally spend hours in front of a monitor. Others are happy with a lot of computer work
I agree that all that matters is the result but this thread was never about that
the journey is the reward. not the result.
-
In commerce, editorial, most anything, it's the result.
Retouching and manipulation is a slippery slope and during the film days it was the sole domain of advertising, as prior to full adoption of photoshop, retouching was expensive.
Now everyone has it, some are good, some are frightful, most somewhere in the middle.
Regardless, the toothpaste is out of the tube and every image of importance has some form of manipulation.
IMO
BC
But surely there will come a replacement for toothpaste? No? A change in fashion? A return to reality? If it does, I think it will be women-led. I hope to God it does come, if only to make looking at pictures more interesting again.
Rob C
-
the journey is the reward. not the result.
Ommmmmmmmmmm. ;D
-
Lets bring it back to the OP again, with whom I agree;
Cut to 2011 and I have been shooting with the Aptus12R on a Cambo Ultima. In 9 months I have not done a single stitch, HDR or focus stack. If it doesn't work out the camera I chuck it. I am loving photography again.
Anyone else have these have this experience? Any other opinions on these work flows that I find over complicated.
Having not wanted to let go of film alongside digital, the AFi-II 12 (Aptus-II 12) is the first digital product to make me let go of film, a merge to point of me being fully content with the image quality. It brings me further than film but with satisfaction to my critical eye. It is not about the gear itself. Nor of having the latest at disposal, and nor have I been smoking! Let us be frank, we all know that very soon there will be 100MP and 160MP backs. I am sure they will be great. So what? What to my experience sets apart the 12 is the image quality. Colors are very right right out of box, curve adjustments, some WB if required, adjustments of specific colors to enhance etc as per our critical creative eye. Simple. Capture One works really excellent and just like my brain: photographically.
I am back to photography again. Not the gear.
Best regards
Anders
P.s. Financing was by selling five camera systems. I feel happier now. It is simple, photographic and even two lenses will do. Focus on IMAGE. And indeed, forgetting of the gear upgrade race, I have images ;D.