Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: pcunite on October 27, 2010, 04:51:42 pm
-
First of all, I apologize for posting this image in the MFD section. I won't do it again. I appeal to the moderator for grace as I explain why.
I don't like 35mm forums. I don't like their images, I don't like their technique, and I don't like their owner's attitudes. I really enjoy Luminous Landscape because of those who post here. I enjoy the very high quality imagery that comes from masterful technique and on occasion images that appear to be created from team efforts.
Since I am a 35mm system owner I can't participate in many of the discussions about gear that occur here. Even my opinion of what is best is not relevant because after all, I have not written the check for MFD. When I'm not in a bad mood, it is fun to watch the firework shows here, however. There are days when I feel like I should just buy a cheap MFD system (or worse claim I still love MF film) to be taken seriously.
To enjoy the fun, and maybe gain some respect I humbly post an image from my archive. To me it looks nice. I do photography for commercial reasons, but I always try to get as much of my heart into my work. A lot of what I do is mostly boring I think and does not get much internet forum praise. If the MFD owners here think this image sucks, I'll accept that and move on.
I will say that this image is not perfect, I have yet to make a perfect image. There are subtle things I wish I could change. The print was stunning.
(http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/3198/llshow.jpg)
-
I like this image too.
You know, I was relooking recently to Eugene Smith images after a Rob's post mentionned it.
I almost forgotten how powerfull he was, what could he do with any camera. Look, those pics are not surgery, they lack resolution to our standards, they are grainy etc...
but not a lot of people on earth capable to produce such a powerfull imagery.
As keith said, I could care less what camera anyone uses.
Cheers.
Fred.
-
I like the image a lot too. My only criticism is that I wish she had tilted the cookie sheet slightly forward so I could see the cookies better!
(To enter the fray I'll add that I use a ____________ camera, which suits my purposes quite well, and probably better than would a _____________ camera, but I can't be sure because I haven't tried one.)
Eric
-
I like the image a lot too. My only criticism is that I wish she had tilted the cookie sheet slightly forward so I could see the cookies better!
Me too! That was the first thing I wish I could change.
-
I agree that it's the image which counts, not the equipment, when it comes to photography. However this is a niche technical forum, not a forum about the art of photography in general. If all 35mm users started posting here then it would become just another 35mm forum, which you yourself dislike so perhaps you can see the conundrum. Anyway, I don't see why you can't participate in this forum. Everyone is welcome whether they own MF digital gear or not. The idea is just to keep the posts on topic to keep the forum relevant. Just my $0.02
-
Thank you Graham. Your work is excellent and a favorite style of mine.
-
Its a nice shot, but if i needed to nick pick. I think an apron would also be a nice added touch, and I would also like to see a little more of the cookies.
-
So just who is crazy?
Cheers,
-
"I don't like 35mm forums. I don't like their images, I don't like their technique, and I don't like their owner's attitudes."
What an astonishing expression of arrogance. A prize-winning post.
I hope you stay right here as I don't have any mf gear and don't visit very often. And, fwiw (as a 35mm user, probably nothing) your posted image is a banal snapshot; in my ever-so-humble, amateur opinion.
Roy
-
Roy, I don't really agree with your criticism on the OP image. This is a good picture, very usable for an advertising campaign about many subjects, or life style etc... It would need IMO photoshoping, for example to enhance the gran'ma's time colors, but the base is good. In terms of purely photographic art, this picture is sensitive and "refreshing" (can't find the way to express it), it brings good vibes. The expression of the lady is perfect. Not a spectacular image that jump in your eyes straight away but a good picture according to me.
I wouldn't mind having this picture in the agency's archives if I where an AD, and printed big, it would also fit perfectly in a serious art gallery. Actually, some very good photographers have made their WW reputation with this kind of pictures.
Regards.
-
Fred is correct, this is a really nice picture. The colours are good, technically everything is spot-on, and it is a long way from being a "banal snapshot". And like most people, the last thing I would bother to ask is what camera was used to take the shot.
John
-
I don't see the point of this thread to be honest. Is it for a critique of the picture or is it for the purpose of a rant. Either way it fails on both counts. :-\
-
That really leads me to the B.C statement about the voices have the same weight in the internet. Now I understand what he meant.
That's right. Even my voice, which is very amusing. But you live in the real world, so you have a different, and more balanced perspective. One of my alternative personalities is as a musician and guitar player - years ago, that's how I earned my living. Something which struck me then was that the very best players I met would sound amazing on anything - you could hand them any guitar that was lying around, and they would blow you away.
To paraphrase an old saying - those who can do, do, those who can't do teach, and those who can't do or teach hang around internet forums. As Fred would say, just kidding, folks.
John
-
That's right. Even my voice, which is very amusing. But you live in the real world, so you have a different, and more balanced perspective. One of my alternative personalities is as a musician and guitar player - years ago, that's how I earned my living. Something which struck me then was that the very best players I met would sound amazing on anything - you could hand them any guitar that was lying around, and they would blow you away.
To paraphrase an old saying - those who can do, do, those who can't do teach, and those who can't do or teach hang around internet forums. As Fred would say, just kidding, folks.
John
Absolutly! I actually saw that many times. Only a very very good musician can take advantage of a Stradivarius.
-
This image is definitely well executed. I like the coherence between the simple composition, natural looking lighting and what comes accross of the personnality of the subject, natural and relaxed also. It has a very negative film feel to it. It is a no show off image that would get few points on Photosig.
Tell me about those 35mm shooters, they remind me of Bose owners driving their Toyota to work. I bet they drink coke and eat at Mac Donalds as well. 8)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I just want a damn Oatmeal raisin cookie off that tray. LOL
Nice shot
-
I just want a damn Oatmeal raisin cookie off that tray. LOL
Nice shot
No, No! Chocolate Chip, please!
Eric
-
I appreciate the pat on the back gentlemen, I really needed that from my peers. I think that in order to get to the next level, the level I want to be at, I need to start communicating with people who's work I admire. These are typically MFD users. To all 35mm users (me too) don't take offense to my statement about us, it is not arrogance toward our group, but appreciation for those above us (style not equipment wise). I know about RainerV and others. However, there are no local clubs I like or even a photographer in my area that I admire in the style I wish to shoot. Other forums are pretty wild, thus LL becomes a safe haven.
I work weekly for a local magazine. I am very close to negotiating the ability to shoot whatever I want and the businesses just supply the needed items. This is what I have always wanted. I don't think I would be in competition with the other advertising shooters here at all. Somehow I would like to find one and ask them questions.
There is a disconnect in what I see in my mind, and using the equipment to realize that vision. For me I struggle with lighting, followed by post processing. This synthesis with my vision and light/post I must find. My work is well received in my local economy but they don't have the eye that this board has. Up to a point (leaving my personal style intact) I want to please a more advanced audience. However, I only wish to shoot for this magazine exclusively so I would not be competing with anyone here.
-
I hope you stay right here as I don't have any mf gear and don't visit very often. And, fwiw (as a 35mm user, probably nothing) your posted image is a banal snapshot; in my ever-so-humble, amateur opinion.
I truly value your feedback. I typically receive these kinds of remarks on other forums so I have long since been afraid to show my work. When I read comments like yours my first thought is "my customers must be idiots." And that is the crux of the matter. Am I a charlatan? Where do the technical and artistic lines meet? I don't really desire an online forum following of my work, but somehow more eyes have to see it to provide me with clues.
-
I appreciate the pat on the back gentlemen, I really needed that from my peers. I think that in order to get to the next level, the level I want to be at, I need to start communicating with people who's work I admire. These are typically MFD users. To all 35mm users (me too) don't take offense to my statement about us, it is not arrogance toward our group, but appreciation for those above us (style not equipment wise). I know about RainerV and others. However, there are no local clubs I like or even a photographer in my area that I admire in the style I wish to shoot. Other forums are pretty wild, thus LL becomes a safe haven.
I work weekly for a local magazine. I am very close to negotiating the ability to shoot whatever I want and the businesses just supply the needed items. This is what I have always wanted. I don't think I would be in competition with the other advertising shooters here at all. Somehow I would like to find one and ask them questions.
There is a disconnect in what I see in my mind, and using the equipment to realize that vision. For me I struggle with lighting, followed by post processing. This synthesis with my vision and light/post I must find. My work is well received in my local economy but they don't have the eye that this board has. Up to a point (leaving my personal style intact) I want to please a more advanced audience. However, I only wish to shoot for this magazine exclusively so I would not be competing with anyone here.
Okay I will go out on a limb here and this comes from someone that shot 35mm for many years and actually still does on certain jobs. This is NOT about any product but about the formats. For me it is not such a big issue because i work really fast anyway and that is my nature but I think fast and can get the image fairly quickly. Sometimes though when I pick up the 35mm it becomes a little brainless because you tend to let it take over more than you actually working the cam and maybe due to to much automation. In a way that is good but I view it is as bad sometimes as you can get dependent on the automation that these cams can provide. Now i am mostly a manual shooter but let's all face it we cheat and run in auto mode sometimes. My problem with this format is it really does not give me any excitement to shoot although these cams are really brilliant on what they can do. MF does slow you down and not by the machine itself per say but you work the cam just like you would work a Leica M9 for instance and I find that I pay attention more to what is in front of me and also i actually like to work hard so the extra efforts involved in MF make me overall work harder pay attention more and obviously that for me at least turns into better images. Now not saying 35mm can't that is NOT my point. End of day your a artist and you need to produce and the gear really does not matter but sometimes the mindset can and all I am pointing out.
For me I like the MF much better and not going to get into all that stuff but it does give me more motivation to nail everything and let's face it since no one will anyway but I will . I spent a good amount of money on this format and no not even close to 50k but I want to get the most out of it and have the IQ that I am really after. Now sometimes maybe this format does not make sense to some as they shoot certain types of work it is really not setup for, totally understand that and if given what you do it may or may not work. Frankly there is no harm in that at all. You shoot what pays and makes sense to your clients as well. Most MF shooters have two systems anyway. Myself i push the MF onto the 35mm world as much as i can with a certain comfort level in that.
Now if you want to try to get into the MF digital world you certainly can easily given a modest budget. Hassy , Phase, Leaf, Kodak older backs, ZD's all have a big used market out there for pretty good prices and certainly within some of the 35mm Pro ranges if this is what you want to try. I love the format but some will not obviously but I still get excited to see my screen and my 7900 prints come screaming off the rollers. This stuff just turns my jets on. Honestly after 35 years working as a Pro anything that can get my jets pumped is worth having. It may not be for you in your case and this is when you need to sit down do the Pro's and Cons and frankly really do your homework if this will buy you any advantage at all, if not than don't do it improve yourself maybe with lighting classes and such instead of jumping formats. I already did but I still need to do a lot and this will take money but my web site is 9 years old and that is really sad on my part. So if this is more important is promote yourself than dump the money there . For me these are my next purchases is to get more business. As everyone here may not say it but everyone here has lost clients or slowed down due to the economy and i don't care what type of shooting you do it has affected all of us and we all need to look for more work. So if you go down this path do it with care.
-
Quite why this is now in danger of turning into a 'one format compared to another thread' is beyond me.
If I understand the OP correctly he is saying he feels he has more in common with the folk that post here rather than on the small format threads. This forum has always attracted those who earn their crust in the industry regardless of the size of the sensor they use. The problem is this is the 'Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography Forum' and therein lays disharmony, and if I understand the position of the OP, the reason for this thread.
Agreed.
This section of the forum tends to be format myopic, as if a few millimeters here or there will have any effect or whether a photographer is considered good, or professional decided by what type of camera they own.
This section of the forum also tends to be schizophrenic.
One on hand it endeavors to reach the more advanced amateur or professional photographer, but still clings to a heading that is format restrictive, allowing certain people to adopt the role of moderator police desperately trying to hold to a certain standard that is virtually irrelevant and doesn't exist in the professional world.
Worse it draws the brand and format brigade to argue like a moth to a flame. Every time I see one of these format, brand war threads, it reminds me of those guys that sit in sports bars, have crocked arguing why the Red Sox suck and the Yankees are divine. (or vice versa). It's conversation that goes nowhere.
I understand the camera reps and dealers pushing a brand or format, especially since the margins are higher on the more expensive cameras, but every time I hear a photographer scream they would only shoot with one format, I think, wow, how limiting.
When I see a photograph posted on the "show your image section" (or whatever it's called, I think of all the thousands of really outstanding photographs shot with everything from 35mm to Point and Shoots that would be excluded (once again by the self appointment format police), if you could ever get those photographers to post and share here anyway.
In a way I think that is a shame because this could be a great place for real discussion on what it takes to produce, style, shoot and deliver an exceptional photograph without some kind of outdated format requirement. All because of a few millimeters in frame size means something to someone that still clings to their 7 year old 22mpx camera back.
Now in all honesty, I shoot the camera(s) I am comfortable with. I love and use my contax (plural), but am not silly enough to think that it works for all, or sometimes most circumstances. I actually would buy into the Hasselblad system today (and still might) just because I would like a little higher sync speed for some images, but I don't know that I want to drop even $20,000 in today's world for another system. I can think of a lot better places to put my money that will move my career forward.
I hate to say it, but in today's digital photography world, the camera format or brand has less to do with the photograph than probably anytime in history.
In the days of film, few buyers of photography asked or cared about the format, even though there was usually a different look or style associated with format. There's exception to every rule, because there was also specific functions you could only do with a large format film cameras, though today many of these functions are now done in software, blending of images and retouching/post production.
In fact in the film days, 90% of the reasons we used any of the larger formats was it made it easier for clients to edit, without having to bend over and look at a thousand slides through a loupe, or retouch directly on a large format transparency or print.
But even then most camera and format choices were the decision and domain of the photographer.
With digital capture, the light box is now a computer screen, the format's so detailed and large that all of them cover much more than the 2000 pixel wide canvas every client uses to preview and edit.
In digital two available formats, 645 (or almost 645) and 35mm are very close together. So close that printing for your portfolio, a short run book, or web display shows little difference. I have portfolios of all sizes up to 13x19 pages and nobody that looks ever comments about any part of the technical requirements.
The questions I do get revolve around budget, crew size, how I handle post production, work with the subject, create or add to the creative brief, deliver a project (the list goes on) but it is a given that most creative buyers of content know that a good photographer will use what's appropriate and they also know that 99.999% of all professional digital cameras will fit almost any need.
What I do know is years ago medium format camera/back makers shot themselves in the foot or better put blew their legs off by not keeping up with moveable iso and a decent lcd preview. If anything kills the buzz of a shoot, it's having to always be tethered to view and display an image that looks close to what the intended version will be. Some of this would be passable if the medium format makers cameras weren't priced at double the smaller formats and usually required double the workflow and time in workflow matters.
Last night I flew in and got to the studio at 11:15. I had a weeks shoot that had to be processed for web galleries, edited and displayed by the deadline of this morning and working straight through we finished at 6:45 am. Now had I shot a camera that really had the ability to embed a look into the file, produce an in camera jpeg large enough for web display without processing, I could have cut my time down to 1/2 of that (at most).
So IMO it's not the size of the frame, it's the usability of the camera from start to finish. Actually it's just about the photograph, nothing more.
Maybe I'm stubborn enough to use the cameras I want to use (which does include medium format), but sometimes I even shake my head and wonder why I bother. Especially at 6:45 am.
BC
-
snip...If anything kills the buzz of a shoot, it's having to always be tethered to view and display an image that looks close to what the intended version will be. Some of this would be passable if the medium format makers cameras weren't priced at double the smaller formats and usually required double the workflow and time in workflow matters.
So IMO it's not the size of the frame, it's the usability of the camera from start to finish. Actually it's just about the photograph, nothing more.
BC
Amen #2
-
it's the usability of the camera from start to finish.
That was what I was talking about. All the other stuff i have no idea where you pick that up but you seem to repeat it excessively. I shoot multiple formats but prefer the MF one. End of story
-
Nice tone of your picture.
I agree that the format of the camera has nothing to do with the keeping the historical records, but on aesthetics and details, the format has a lot to do imho. Maybe because I started with a 4x4 film and still stuck with 6x7 format film. For convenience's sake, 35mm is good, but if you plan to enlarge to huge sizes MF and LF are necessary
35mm also gives nice shots on times! Visit this link: http://www.onelifephotos.com/drbista to check.
zenny
-
In a way I think that is a shame because this could be a great place for real discussion on what it takes to produce, style, shoot and deliver an exceptional photograph without some kind of outdated format requirement. All because of a few millimeters in frame size means something to someone that still clings to their 7 year old 22mpx camera back.
Thanks for commenting in my thread... I was hoping you would drop by. It would be awesome if there was a safe place to have these types of discussions if they where also be beneficial to persons like yourself. I know I could really use it!
I am right now putting together a big shoot for me. If all goes well I will have full access to a once a month section of a magazine and I will get to shoot it however I want. How sweet is that! I have to prove myself though. This mean I have to do it all, getting the models, choosing the clothes, securing the location, making it all come together... light the thing, push the shutter button, post process, deliver. Yikes!!!! If I do this right I'm am going to be good, do this wrong... I might have more time for posting! ;)
It has given me such repect for you guys. In the past I would see an image an think "I could do that, plus I'd fix that!". Now I think "how did he pull all that off by himself?"
-
"I don't like 35mm forums. I don't like their images, I don't like their technique, and I don't like their owner's attitudes."
What an astonishing expression of arrogance. A prize-winning post.
I hope you stay right here as I don't have any mf gear and don't visit very often. And, fwiw (as a 35mm user, probably nothing) your posted image is a banal snapshot; in my ever-so-humble, amateur opinion.
Roy
Roy, I'm afraid I have to agre with you. It does zero for me, whether on 8x10, 5x7, 4x5, 120 or 35mm and all the minor English sizes in between. But, it's a big world. And so many effing emperors! In my once-pro, now-am point of view. (A dedicated has-been, then, which is always better than a never-was.)
;-)
Rob C
-
Roy, I'm afraid I have to agre with you. It does zero for me,
The image is a carefully selected one. I know what kind of response I would get if the woman was very young and mostly unclothed. There are subtle things in the image, that I like, when I look beyond seeing another young face. It does loose its effect somewhat resized for the web, the DOF seemed to change for one thing.
-
Well, as someone who used to sell 110/ 126 film cameras and Polaroids, and who's used everything from those to disposable film cameras to 35mm film/digital to medium format... as to the question of whether it's the camera or the photographer, to me it's obviously both. I don't expect to make the same photographs with a Holga and a 4x5, but both can have their place. What interests me is the image that's produced and how accurately it portrays the vision of the photographer. No, you can't make a 20x30" print from a camera with a Lensbaby, or maybe you can. A Phase One or Hasselblad isn't going to be making 10 fps anytime soon. I'm intrigued by people who can master the equipment they have to work with, whatever it is.
Here, though, we're all looking at 72ppi (or thereabouts) images and there is some sort of filter built into that. It may be that we can't realize the depth and beauty of a large print from an on screen .jpg, but in a way it does level the playing field.
And make mine ginger snaps, please!
Mike.
-
And make mine ginger snaps, please!
Mike.
That's an amazing coincidence, Mike!
I have been off all biscuits for several years because of the heart problem and the total ban on animal fats, but I bought a packet of ginger biscuits just yesterday - you gotta have something to make up for weak coffee in the morning (no napalm allowed either) and I thought ginger would do it. I do allow myself proper coffee at lunchtime, but that's also against advice, so I add a soupçon of cognac in order to protect against the water, but that, too, is against the friggin' rules, which state a single glass of red wine per day. What the rules don't state, however, is what you should do if you don't like wine at all - take the single glass or do without, and if to take, who knows what ills might follow?
As you see, Shakespeare and Prendergast have a lot in common.
Rob C
-
An olive branch from 35mm - we're not all crazy.
Welcome to the 'Equipment & Techniques > Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs / Large Sensor Photography and Biscuits Forum'
Now you're talking!
;-)
Rob C
Edit: will any fruitcakes be allowed?
-
Now you're talking!
;-)
Rob C
Edit: will any fruitcakes be allowed?
Not only fruitcakes, but nutters as well! :D
Ray
-
There is a polite insanity to this place, I love it!
-
There is a polite insanity to this place, I love it!
Well, membership is like Hotel California rules; you have been warned.
Rob C
-
My exhaustive tests on one sample of each kind prove conclusively that Whole Wheat Biscuits have 31.4159 more stops of Dynamic Range than do ordinary white biscuits.
-
Hah, DXO proves conclusively that my biscuit is better than all your pathetic biscuits combined.
Yea but how did you cook them. That's really what counts . LOL
I still want a freaking cookie from that sweet old lady. Probably damn good too.
-
Yea but how did you cook them. That's really what counts . LOL
I still want a freaking cookie from that sweet old lady. Probably damn good too.
So you tasted the old lady instead of the cookies? Worrying... but nothing really surprises me much anymore.
Rob C
-
So you tasted the old lady instead of the cookies? Worrying... but nothing really surprises me much anymore.
Rob C
ROTFLMAO.
Okay Rob you get a check mark. That was a good one. Now how many of those whisky's did you have today again. LOL
Have a nice weekend folks
-
My exhaustive tests on one sample of each kind prove conclusively that Whole Wheat Biscuits have 31.4159 more stops of Dynamic Range than do ordinary white biscuits.
But if the biscuits are light, you are in a serious diet and the sensor's size will be dramatically reduced. Oh well, you'll loose weight.
I caught Guy. It's because he likes big chocolate cakes that he doesn't want to reduce format.
Good week-end too.
-
In a way I think that is a shame because this could be a great place for real discussion on what it takes to produce, style, shoot and deliver an exceptional photograph without some kind of outdated format requirement. All because of a few millimeters in frame size means something to someone that still clings to their 7 year old 22mpx camera back.
Agreed; however, I think you got the last part the wrong way around.
What MFDB shooter does actually worship equipment ?
-
I would love the image if you shot wider, closer to the woman, and at the largest aperture possible.
Watch some Stanley Kubrick movies. You'll see what I mean.
-
Rob, the clue is in word "fruitcakes".
This is the Equipment & Techniques > Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography and Biscuits Forum. Do you see the word "cakes" mentioned anywhere? Duh!
Clearly the wrong format!
But Keith, this is a Transatlantic generated forum; who knows what gets lost in translation?
Let's face it: Cookie and the Cupcakes are musicians!
http://www.youtube.com/watcg?v=qcvmN7TN5Ic&feature=related
Rob C
-
I saw a coffee shop chain in NY, I think, called "Fruits, Nuts and Flakes". Sounds like that's where we're at.
Don't call me crazy - just call me a cab - I wanna get outa here!
Edmund
But Keith, this is a Transatlantic generated forum; who knows what gets lost in translation?
Let's face it: Cookie and the Cupcakes are musicians!
http://www.youtube.com/watcg?v=qcvmN7TN5Ic&feature=related
Rob C
-
Don't call me crazy - just call me a cab - I wanna get outa here!
Edmund
Okay: you're a cab.
Rob C