What do we want?

[Jonathan Cross]

David Eckels has a post about his recent trip with links to his blog and images (Landscape Showcase / New blog: WalkAbout 2022).  They are wonderful.  It did spark a line of thought in my mind, however, about the cameras and lenses we use and the way we show and share images.

Let’s start with what we do with our images. There are no doubt professional photographers who need to make large prints and there is the well-known saying about the pleasure of having a print in your hands.  What is a large print, 66”x44”?  A 44” printer seems to be between £3,000 and £5,000 (3,600 to 6,000USD), and then there is the paper and ink.  This is a serious investment.  An alternative for low volumes would be to have them printed.  In the UK, an agency that often advertises in the photography magazines, will print a 150x100cm image (about 60”x40”) for £186 (222USD).   

At 300dpi, 66”x44” equates to 260Mp or 116Mp at 200dpi. 

David has chosen to share his images on-line.  Electronic displays are being used much more, though the quality of many large advertising displays leaves a lot to be desired!  A large TV display capable of showing 8k video needs 33M dots, though there are not many around yet and how many of us have rooms big enough to justify this size?   Shops and offices may be different. 

All this leads me on to how many Mp do we need in our cameras.  Obviously more Mp gives more scope to crop.  I do have to mention LR’s super resolution that can be used to upscale a lot.  40Mp will print 24”x16” at 300dpi and using super resolution will increase this significantly.

Then there is the issue of lenses.  What range of focal lengths do we need? Obviously it depends on genre.  Wildlife will require long lenses, landscape often needs wide angle, portraits and street, in between.  Then there is the Leica Q2 way of coping.  One lens and in-camera cropping. This gives 28mm – 75mm, but, of course, at 75mm there are not too many Mp. 

I write this out of interest, but also wondering where the market is going.  12Mp on a phone can give a 15”x10” print, though purists will raise quality issues.  Given that money is getting tighter in many parts of the world because of rising prices for many basic items, e.g. food and energy, how many of us are willing to buy expensive kit?  I have seen a report this week about Apple’s declining sales, perhaps a symptom of people’s spending decisions.

Best wishes,

Jonathan

[JoeKitchen]

I just had one of my images printed at 20x60 feet.  Granted it was being used as a cinema backdrop on the show American Rust.  But anyway. 

For photography purposes, I am very much of the no-cropping camp unless you are changing the aspect ratio and know it when composing.  Working this way always leads to better compositions, and it is very rarely the case that a cropped image works as good as the original, if well composed to begin with.  So the additional MP of modern sensors, for those who know what they are doing, is not really about more resolution.

The biggest issue for landscape photography is wind; even a small amount will cause the leaves to move.  So landscape photographers are always looking for the fastest shutter speed with the highest ISO without sacrificing color while having a manageable amount of noise.  Of course the higher the ISO, the faster shutter speed you will have, but less color depth and more noise unless ... you decrease the resolution of the image.  Decreasing the resolution will help with color and controlling noise while allowing you to shoot at a higher ISO with faster shutter speeds, and this why the really good landscape guys always go for the highest resolution cameras.  It's all about not having blurred leaves. 

For me, as an architectural photographer, it is about being able to work with a technical camera with independent x and y movements, which requires a digital back that happens to be high in MP.  I also need very low lens cast, which is a product of the micro architecture of the pixels and the lenses I choose to use.  It happens to turn out the IQ4 150, a 150 MP back, is the best for controlling lens cast.  To be honest, I wish it was 60 MP though. 

With video, it's different.  Shooting in 8K and having the ability to punch in (the film phrase for cropping) gives you the potential to make it look like you had another camera with a tighter angle in editing, which is great for interviews.  Or it also allows you to use wider lenses with greater DoF but, since you are punching in only using the center of the frame, avoids the distortion you get with wide angle lenses on the edges.  My wife does this a lot with her slow motion work.  She uses an 8K Red with a Cooke 21mm at some crazy frames per second, but punches in to 2K in post, only using the center of frame.  DoF is great and you are effectively getting a 50mm angle of view, which looks a lot better for food and drink and product. 

Now, insofar as how many lenses you need, I once read an essay by Jock Sturges where he effectively said you should only bring one lens to a shoot.  Doing so forces you to really learn your lens and takes away any distractions from thinking about what lens you should use.  You are more focused.  For amateurs, I tend to agree with this.  Learning your lenses and knowing how they will render your subject takes hours and hours of experience, not something most amateurs will be afforded unless you are okay with destroying your marriage.  So, if this is a hobby for you, get one or two fixed focal length lenses, the two you think will be most applicable, and shoot away.  Dont get sucked into new gear; it's a money hole and even pros end up spending money on stuff they falsely convince themselves they need. 

As a professional though, it is different.  Different focal lengths render subjects differently even if you adjust the compositions to be similar.  Depending on how dramatic or "normal" looking I want a subject to appear will dictate what lens I use.  Note that this is kind of kind of not really a choice since clients will react to how the subject is render given the focal length even if they can not articulate why.  Yes, I am trying to get a certain reaction with the render, but that reaction is dictated by the lens, so I have to use that lens for that reaction.  I bring with myself (for a medium format system) a 28mm, 35mm, 43mm, 55mm, and 90mm lenses.  Now, I have been spending 60+ hours a week on photography for the last 15 years, and I know my lenses without even thinking about it.  So it is not a distraction for me at this point.  I grab the lens I know I need and almost never change my mind at this point. 

So, in the end, it all depends on where you are and what you need.