Topic: Recent Works (Read 853398 times)

Frank Doorhof · « **Reply #1120 on:** June 30, 2008, 11:24:53 am »

@Snook,
People that read all the letters in my replies will read that I always say I DO retouch my work, but that ALOT is lost during downsizing.
If someone wants a RAW file they can always mail me, no problem.

That's also why I showed a 100% crop with the internet version next to it in my second crop post, to show what happens.

It's weird you would judge the quality of a back by internet, internet is sRGB and 8 bits and small, if you want to see the difference between a phase one or leaf back based on internet version, with all due respect but than you are never going to see a difference.

MAYBE..... just maybe.....
All the leaf photographers retouch alot and phase one user don't

Just kidding of course but if you say you see that in all the Leaf files I really can't place that.
I compared both in detail and changing the RAW developer did away with almost all the differences between the leaf and phase one.

I decided to test it in MY workflow and than the Leaf came out on top on shadow detail and skintones, but again change your RAW convertor and the story can be different.

In the very end my decision was based on the support I got from Leaf in the first hours after posting my questions (phase one responded two weeks after I already bought the leaf), and the overal feel of the system in which I liked leaf better.

But again if you want to judge a system on internet versions or on retouched work you are doing it wrong, get RAW files from the SAME scenes and compare flash with daylight/ambiantlight and than you can see a difference, otherwise it's almost impossible.

By the way, you asked me to post when I got the brighter screen. Got it today in the mail and posted a small review on my blog www.doorhof.nl/blog in the review section of the RZ.

203 · « **Reply #1121 on:** June 30, 2008, 11:36:06 am »

So, back to the photos.

Snook · « **Reply #1122 on:** June 30, 2008, 11:42:41 am »

Quote

@Snook,
People that read all the letters in my replies will read that I always say I DO retouch my work, but that ALOT is lost during downsizing.
If someone wants a RAW file they can always mail me, no problem.

That's also why I showed a 100% crop with the internet version next to it in my second crop post, to show what happens.

It's weird you would judge the quality of a back by internet, internet is sRGB and 8 bits and small, if you want to see the difference between a phase one or leaf back based on internet version, with all due respect but than you are never going to see a difference.

MAYBE..... just maybe.....
All the leaf photographers retouch alot and phase one user don't
Just kidding of course but if you say you see that in all the Leaf files I really can't place that.
I compared both in detail and changing the RAW developer did away with almost all the differences between the leaf and phase one.

I decided to test it in MY workflow and than the Leaf came out on top on shadow detail and skintones, but again change your RAW convertor and the story can be different.

In the very end my decision was based on the support I got from Leaf in the first hours after posting my questions (phase one responded two weeks after I already bought the leaf), and the overal feel of the system in which I liked leaf better.

But again if you want to judge a system on internet versions or on retouched work you are doing it wrong, get RAW files from the SAME scenes and compare flash with daylight/ambiantlight and than you can see a difference, otherwise it's almost impossible.

By the way, you asked me to post when I got the brighter screen. Got it today in the mail and posted a small review on my blog www.doorhof.nl/blog in the review section of the RZ.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204500\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I just saw it thank you..:+}
Probably going to pick one up myself or another Bill Maxwell screen..
Thanks for the information..:+]
Snook

Frank Doorhof · « **Reply #1123 on:** June 30, 2008, 11:43:57 am »

Will update the review in the coming days after I did some work with it.

shelby_lewis · « **Reply #1124 on:** July 01, 2008, 01:36:10 am »

Quote

Great work everyone... I'm a small format shooter (MF wanna-be) and I truly enjoy the work and discourse in this thread.

Keep it up!

My Best,
Shelby
http://www.shelbylewis.com

MichaelEzra · « **Reply #1125 on:** July 01, 2008, 08:54:48 am »

Quote

People that read all the letters in my replies will read that I always say I DO retouch my work, but that ALOT is lost during downsizing.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204500\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Frank, if this is something you would want to change, you can try downsizing in 2 steps - 2x the final size, sharpen a bit and then downsize once more to final size, resharpen.

HarperPhotos · « **Reply #1126 on:** July 01, 2008, 11:56:38 pm »

Gidday,

Some thing different. Shot yesterday for a office and stationary company.

Stats

Lensbabies F6.8
Mamiya 645AFDII
Leaf Aptus 75
8th Sec 50ISO
Processed in Adobe Bridge
Lighting was with Dedo’s

Cheers

Simon

Frank Doorhof · « **Reply #1127 on:** July 02, 2008, 02:00:46 am »

@Michael,
I resize in one step and sharpen, tried two steps but could not see a huge difference.

MichaelEzra · « **Reply #1128 on:** July 02, 2008, 09:30:35 am »

Frank,

if your original file is much larger than the final web image, you could try the first downsizing step to a larger size than 2x of final. The idea is that each resizing iteration carries some information from a larger size.

When image gets downsized there is some pixel averaging being performed in a specific radious around each pixel. When downsize ratio of each downsizing iteration is not very large, this radius is small and each resulting pixel is packaged with more precise information averaged from the original image pixels. If radious is large (at large downsize ratio) the averaging is so intense that details get lost.

Depending on the algorithm of interpolation, the results of performing downsizing in iterative steps or in a single step may or may not be the same. However, when Bicubic method is used (as in Photoshop), it seems to have an effect and you should get more detailed downsizing with properly selected iterations. It may be worth some time to calculate the best iteration strategy, but for now, some experimenting may suffice:) May be give it a try with more than 2 iterations, see if that makes a difference.

Frank Doorhof · « **Reply #1129 on:** July 02, 2008, 12:39:04 pm »

I will do some tests this week.

simplify · « **Reply #1130 on:** July 02, 2008, 03:17:41 pm »

p45+ Mamiya 120mm
[attachment=7287:attachment]
[attachment=7288:attachment]
[attachment=7289:attachment]
[attachment=7290:attachment]

micek · « **Reply #1131 on:** July 02, 2008, 06:23:01 pm »

Quote

p45+ Mamiya 120mm
[attachment=7287:attachment]
[attachment=7288:attachment]
[attachment=7289:attachment]
[attachment=7290:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=205055\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

@simplify: I like the second one very much.

Frank Doorhof · « **Reply #1132 on:** July 03, 2008, 02:14:24 am »

@simplify,
What a first post.
Great shots, love the inclusion of people in the landscapes.
All are great for me.

mcfoto · « **Reply #1133 on:** July 03, 2008, 08:43:41 am »

Hi
I would like everyone to look at the work of Alec Soth that was used for this excellent story. I don't know what format these photos were taken on but for me they are very moving.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/portal/main.jht...m_america05.xml

Thanks Denis

condit79 · « **Reply #1134 on:** July 03, 2008, 10:02:05 am »

Quote

Hi
I would like everyone to look at the work of Alec Soth that was used for this excellent story. I don't know what format these photos were taken on but for me they are very moving.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/portal/main.jht...m_america05.xml

Thanks Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=205215\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Alec Soth works large format, typically 8x10 from what i understand. He shot the dog days, bogota series on medium format. But the rest is all large format, and always film. He´s one of my favs. I wouldn´t say the landscapes are his forte by any means. He´s much better working with people, but the landscapes are essential in telling this story.

simplify · « **Reply #1135 on:** July 03, 2008, 10:48:58 am »

Quote

Hi
I would like everyone to look at the work of Alec Soth that was used for this excellent story. I don't know what format these photos were taken on but for me they are very moving.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/portal/main.jht...m_america05.xml

Thanks Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=205215\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Alec Soth is one of my favorite photographers. I own Dog Days Bagota and it is an amazing piece of work.

Here are some more of my images from the past month. P45+

[attachment=7316:attachment]

[attachment=7317:attachment]

[attachment=7318:attachment]

[attachment=7319:attachment]

haefnerphoto · « **Reply #1136 on:** July 03, 2008, 10:18:43 pm »

For those of you who had a look at Alec Soth's work and the accompanying article I thought I'd add that Detroit is even worse then it's portrayed. I live and work just outside of the city and have for the majority of my 55 years. The economic and political problems that face us are tremendous, strangely though, as Martha Reeves was quoted, the city is better looking and even a little safer then any other time of my adult life. But this is a photography forum so perhaps I should comment on the photography, which, I though was okay, but then again I see those scenes whenever I venture a few miles south. Attached is a shot I took last November of the Michigan Central Station which was designed by the same architects as the Grand Central Station in New York. It hasn't fared as well. I started shooting there when it was still a viable facility, I believe it stopped being used about twenty years ago. It's claim to fame most recently was as a location seen at the end of the movie, Transformers. Jim

[attachment=7326:attachment]

simplify · « **Reply #1137 on:** July 03, 2008, 10:32:29 pm »

Quote

For those of you who had a look at Alec Soth's work and the accompanying article I thought I'd add that Detroit is even worse then it's portrayed. I live and work just outside of the city and have for the majority of my 55 years. The economic and political problems that face us are tremendous, strangely though, as Martha Reeves was quoted, the city is better looking and even a little safer then any other time of my adult life. But this is a photography forum so perhaps I should comment on the photography, which, I though was okay, but then again I see those scenes whenever I venture a few miles south. Attached is a shot I took last November of the Michigan Central Station which was designed by the same architects as the Grand Central Station in New York. It hasn't fared as well. I started shooting there when it was still a viable facility, I believe it stopped being used about twenty years ago. It's claim to fame most recently was as a location seen at the end of the movie, Transformers. Jim
[attachment=7326:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=205401\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The special thing about Alec Soth's work is his perfect light and color. I can stare at the images for an extremely long time because I am not distracted by any kind of color shift or digital look. I would like to see how he would shoot this train station above. Your version looks very cyan and the grass is pretty nuclear, although I do like the shot.

marc gerritsen · « **Reply #1138 on:** July 03, 2008, 10:52:58 pm »

Quote

For those of you who had a look at Alec Soth's work and the accompanying article I thought I'd add that Detroit is even worse then it's portrayed. I live and work just outside of the city and have for the majority of my 55 years. The economic and political problems that face us are tremendous, strangely though, as Martha Reeves was quoted, the city is better looking and even a little safer then any other time of my adult life. But this is a photography forum so perhaps I should comment on the photography, which, I though was okay, but then again I see those scenes whenever I venture a few miles south. Attached is a shot I took last November of the Michigan Central Station which was designed by the same architects as the Grand Central Station in New York. It hasn't fared as well. I started shooting there when it was still a viable facility, I believe it stopped being used about twenty years ago. It's claim to fame most recently was as a location seen at the end of the movie, Transformers. Jim
[attachment=7326:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=205401\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Jim
As far as good lighting and all that is concerned your photo stands way above Alec's work!
m*

oscar falero · « **Reply #1139 on:** July 03, 2008, 11:34:59 pm »

Quote

The special thing about Alec Soth's work is his perfect light and color. I can stare at the images for an extremely long time because I am not distracted by any kind of color shift or digital look. I would like to see how he would shoot this train station above. Your version looks very cyan and the grass is pretty nuclear, although I do like the shot.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=205405\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Simplify,

You can start by selling your P45+ and start shooting 8x10 negative film if that lovely creamy feel you seem to enjoy in Soth's work is what you are after. Now don't be surprised when you see the film at 200% as we are used to doing so with digital cameras and then you start to question why there is not as much detail/info as Jim's nice shot of the train station. Digital just has that sterile(clinical) quality to it. This is the same as HDTVs versus HQ tube equivalents as they tend to show way too much info and the brightness level can be a eye sore at times.

Print it them both and that's another story. The 8x10 will just feel nicer not better these are just the properties of a Large Format film.

Author Topic: Recent Works (Read 853398 times)

203

Snook