Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: PDN PhotoPlus 2013  (Read 26956 times)

ndevlin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 679
    • Follow me on Twitter
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #60 on: November 01, 2013, 09:24:46 pm »

How do you define "great"?

And is "great" photography important?

Has it ever been important or is it just that the photographs that we saw on a daily basis were those that had been taken by those with some skill and an eye for their subject (plus lots of film to go through) plus an editorial process to find "the best"?

If I take a picture of a particular moment with my phone to share with others, does it matter more if the picture is considered "great" or just simply if it captures the mood and allows me to share the moment?

I would argue that it isn't the ubiquity of imaging that is degrading the quality rather the lack of a filtering process is meaning that more than just "great" photographs are seen. The desire to share is greater than the desire to filter. And on the other end, people are thus shifting focus from caring about quality to caring about ... intimacy?

Internet-driven democratization degrades every field it touches.  In law, only truly leading cases, as determined by the best of the bar, were ever published...in books.   Now, every mind-fart from every mediocrity finds equal weight on internet databases.  You can literally find jurisprudential support for every legal error ever made.  It's both sad and funny.

I'm unapologetically elitist and and believe that relativism is an excuse to cover a failure or inability to attempt meaningful moral/aesthetic/etc judgments, and thus inimical to art or other high endeavour.

But then maybe I'm just wrong.

But is anyone ever really 'wrong'?

 :P
- N.
 
Logged
Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera        ww

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #61 on: November 02, 2013, 02:56:27 am »

Hi,

A general answer: Yes, you are wrong if you ignore/deny facts.

Best regards
Erik


But then maybe I'm just wrong.

But is anyone ever really 'wrong'?


Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #62 on: November 02, 2013, 03:03:09 am »

Hi,

I am under the impression that 'Wildlightfoto" has very fine Leica-R lenses with no digital camera in production to put them on, although it would be possible to put them on the D800E with a Leitax adapter. He also needs a camera with a viewfinder that is good for manual focus. So he is in a different situation than you or me.

I am principally attracted to the A7 series. I would not be surprised to see an A9 coming (used to be top of the line in Sony/Minolta nomenclature).

Best regards
Erik

Let's say you have a Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II, 16-35 f/2.8 II and 70-200 f/4L IS and a Canon 6D. The total weight is 2960 grams and with the Sony A7R without adapter this would be 2670 and with adapter and I guess with the adapter it would be the same weight.

Resolution wise we have seen the D800 and the Canon 5D3 to be almost the same real resolution according to DxO and what I see from the files also. So if the Sony delivers all the extra pixels it would maximally be a linear resolution increase of 28%. Not even enough to go one size up from say A3 to A2 with same PPI. A 1 meter wide picture from the 5D3 could be printed maximum at 1,27 meters with the Sony and most likely it will not deliver that. At normal viewing distance would you even see that? I think this is splitting hairs  ;D

Better DR, this is nice, but shooting both Canon 5D3 and Nikon D800E it is very few pictures where I can't produce a clean shot from a single RAW file from the Canon. But of course the Nikon is better.

So I highly doubt that this would convince many photographers.
 
E.g. for a weight reduction that would really count one would need to go down in sensor size or go for very slow lenses. And using an EVF rather than a OVF, not me unless there was a very clear motivation for doing that.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #63 on: November 02, 2013, 05:51:02 am »

Internet-driven democratization degrades every field it touches.  In law, only truly leading cases, as determined by the best of the bar, were ever published...in books.   Now, every mind-fart from every mediocrity finds equal weight on internet databases.  You can literally find jurisprudential support for every legal error ever made.  It's both sad and funny.

I'm unapologetically elitist and and believe that relativism is an excuse to cover a failure or inability to attempt meaningful moral/aesthetic/etc judgments, and thus inimical to art or other high endeavour.

But then maybe I'm just wrong.

But is anyone ever really 'wrong'?

 :P
- N.
 

I think the Internet has brought the very best and very worst at the same time. But the filtering is somewhat up to you. So you could be right and wrong at the same time  ;)

barryfitzgerald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 688
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #64 on: November 02, 2013, 07:24:30 am »

They don't have to march, they just have to not pull out their credit card.

No, it won't. Why not? Because it won't make a lick of difference to those that are happy snapping away with their phones and uploading to facebook a second later. Even if you added a 3G or 4G interface to a FF camera it won't make a difference because the size of the thing is going to make it that much more inconvenient for people to have with them. People bought compact cameras in droves because they fitted in the purse, handbag, jacket pocket, etc. This applies to both film and digital cameras.

What impact will an affordable FF camera have? It'll tempt a lot of "fanbois" of other brands to switch. It'll tempt a lot of APS-C owners to upgrade but it will not make a dent in phone-camera sales or win back market share. If the camera+sensor is good enough, it may tempt a lot of FF owners to "buy another."


I really fail to grasp how "aspiring enthusiasts" or more serious photographers are willing to use a cell phone with a camera over a dedicated "real camera". They might for social occasions and the odd facebook photo, but hardly the tool of choice for more considered work is it?
If we're looking for reasons why camera sales have fallen across the board it's an awful lot more than "smart phone cameras"
I can buy the camera phones hurting compacts argument, but not DSLR's or higher end products.


People tend to form overly simplistic reasons why there is a decline in the industry and that's a mistake IMO. Clearly there are over saturation issues, pressed finances are also a "fairly major" factor too, if you have less disposable income you're going to spend less on cameras (and other products too)

A move to "full frame" is beneficial more for the camera makers than anyone else, they can get better margins on these products.
I'm not necessarily saying everyone needs to suddenly move to full frame, for many an APS-C or micro 4/3 will be just great. All I am saying is I expected increased activity and more choices and better prices on full frame products due to competition. That has benefits for everyone, if FF drops in price then it will impact crop bodies too.

In a declining market makers have to find new ways to extract people's cash, full frame is a very obvious one indeed. They've surely played the megapixel card for many years now and it's run out of steam!
Logged

dreed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1717
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #65 on: November 02, 2013, 10:45:08 am »

I really fail to grasp how "aspiring enthusiasts" or more serious photographers are willing to use a cell phone with a camera over a dedicated "real camera". They might for social occasions and the odd facebook photo, but hardly the tool of choice for more considered work is it?

If people with smart phone cameras can get their pictures on to the websites for newspapers and cable TV because they are there when the news breaks and their image is current, what benefit is the professional camera?

Quote
People tend to form overly simplistic reasons why there is a decline in the industry and that's a mistake IMO. Clearly there are over saturation issues, pressed finances are also a "fairly major" factor too, if you have less disposable income you're going to spend less on cameras (and other products too)

I think the economy factor is being over played...

For me, the #1 reason why I haven't bought a new DSLR is that none of the current offerings that would suit me present a compelling reason through better image quality. Maybe other camera owners are similar? Past a certain point in the last 2 to 4 years, cameras have become good enough and image quality plateaued that upgrading is not going to give you anything more.

Quote
A move to "full frame" is beneficial more for the camera makers than anyone else, they can get better margins on these products.

The better margins for full frame won't last forever.

Quote
In a declining market makers have to find new ways to extract people's cash, full frame is a very obvious one indeed.

Agreed! Hence Nikon's new "pure photography" camera.
Logged

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #66 on: November 02, 2013, 12:58:01 pm »

I'm unapologetically elitist and ...

Camera makers are unapologetically capitalist: they seek to profit from both the talented and the talentless.

But then maybe I'm just wrong.

Errare humanum est.
Logged

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #67 on: November 02, 2013, 01:59:13 pm »

I really fail to grasp how "aspiring enthusiasts" or more serious photographers are willing to use a cell phone with a camera over a dedicated "real camera".

iPhone Photography Awards, 2013 Winners

"I always felt that if I took the creative effort to produce a beautiful photo, the quality should be good enough to sell to the top photo agencies, like Geographic’s Image Collection. Today, we’re getting much closer to having camera phones that allow us to achieve this benchmark."

« Last Edit: November 02, 2013, 02:07:26 pm by Isaac »
Logged

BradSmith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 773
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #68 on: November 02, 2013, 04:21:18 pm »

Photography today, has "evolved" to a much much broader spectrum of images being used for differing purposes than in the past.  I think it is clear that most of us here on this site are mostly interested in the narrower spectrum of the past, ie, highly detailed, long tonal ranged photos and equipment to make such photos.  I know that is where I am. 

But it is clear to me that most people who use cameras today are NOT in this same group.  They want the "grab" photo for social media, emailing, etc.   They want the bizarre images that shock the eyes for attention grabbing purposes (think of way, way over the top HDR, or ultra fuzzy, high contrast black and white pinhole-looking closeup images of dog's nostrils.....you know, a lot of what you saw the last time you looked at a photo arts magazine or went into a gallery showing "contemporary" images).

Those of us here have an ongoing interest in the equipment in hopes that it will help us produce a marginally better "technical" image or be more enjoyable to use.  But for almost everyone else whose purposes are the grab or "contemporary art" type photo, the current equipment is MORE than adequate to do what is needed.

I think the industry is in the same place as the audio industry of 25 or so years ago.  ie, technology and mass production reduced the cost and therefore, increased the capability of relatively low cost audio equipment to the point that the industry crashed because for 95+% of the market, the product was good enough and no upgrades were needed.

Brad
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18094
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #69 on: November 02, 2013, 06:55:52 pm »

... I am pretty sure that posters here are serious about photography, a  blanket statement like yours is just an insult to everybody...

Huh!?

Are we reading the same post?

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #70 on: November 02, 2013, 10:23:29 pm »

Hi,

My fault! Sloppy reading!

Best regards
Erik

Huh!?

Are we reading the same post?
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #71 on: November 03, 2013, 04:59:40 am »

iPhone Photography Awards, 2013 Winners

"I always felt that if I took the creative effort to produce a beautiful photo, the quality should be good enough to sell to the top photo agencies, like Geographic’s Image Collection. Today, we’re getting much closer to having camera phones that allow us to achieve this benchmark."




Of course, the logic is flawed: the better the cellphones become the better the tradiitonal cameras do too, and thus the bar that constitutes excellence is ever being raised and the cellphone has to attempt to bridge that shifting gap and expectation of the possible. I don't dispute that where it doesn't matter about quality, that the being there is key, then any old piece of crap is good enough today if it catches the moment.
 
But for high-grade repro and top-drawer usage? I doubt that very much indeed. Of course, some fashion or music guy can use a cellphone and make the fact part of the 'story' and that's valid too, but then it isn't about usefulness or being an appropriate tool, it's about gimmickry.

Rob C

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #72 on: November 03, 2013, 09:58:45 pm »

I don't dispute that where it doesn't matter about quality, that the being there is key, then any old piece of crap is good enough today if it catches the moment.

Content is King.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #73 on: November 04, 2013, 03:43:43 am »

Content is King.



Yes, but in the quoted instance, it had nothing to do with camera choice and everything to do with an overheated  negative drying cabinet kindly supplied by the lab-lads entrusted with rushing the films through for the editor. A very few images survived the partial melting, and who's to say this blurred shot was the best on any roll?

However, had it not been for that cock-up, it's perfectly likely that the images may never have achieved their iconic appeal of today.

Back to Dame Fate's helping hands.

;-)

Rob C

dreed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1717
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #74 on: November 04, 2013, 03:54:10 am »

A good example of how video can be used to present the landscape:

Yosemite Nature Notes: Fall Moments

... now what was that about convergence?
Logged

barryfitzgerald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 688
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #75 on: November 04, 2013, 07:46:07 am »

A good example of how video can be used to present the landscape:

Yosemite Nature Notes: Fall Moments

... now what was that about convergence?

Nice enough but video is entirely different as a medium to a stills photo.
Convergence is mostly about marketing, same as full frame it's there to get folks to spend more cash.

I've no doubts the updated A7 models will have 4k video capture too, if that many use it is another debate.
Whilst I play around with video from time to time, it's a different beast to stills shooting. Why can't folks seem to get that?


Will be interesting to see if this new "Nikon" has video, some say it won't.

Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #76 on: November 04, 2013, 10:34:38 am »

Nice enough but video is entirely different as a medium to a stills photo.
Convergence is mostly about marketing, same as full frame it's there to get folks to spend more cash.

I've no doubts the updated A7 models will have 4k video capture too, if that many use it is another debate.
Whilst I play around with video from time to time, it's a different beast to stills shooting. Why can't folks seem to get that?


Will be interesting to see if this new "Nikon" has video, some say it won't.




Nix! nix! I have both formats and never use the cropped N¡kon anymore. The two are entirely different emotions, just as 6x6 is a different experience (to shoot) than 135 ever was. Nothing to do with ultimate definition nor size of final print at all. It's visceral at the point of doing.

Rob C

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #77 on: November 04, 2013, 12:12:01 pm »

... video ... it's a different beast to stills shooting. Why can't folks seem to get that?

Folk get that and don't care at all.

What they care about is that their camera now lets them do stuff they couldn't do before.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2013, 01:52:47 pm by Isaac »
Logged

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #78 on: November 04, 2013, 12:20:27 pm »

I think it is clear that most of us here on this site are mostly interested in the narrower spectrum of the past, ie, highly detailed, long tonal ranged photos...

I think you only noticed a narrow slice of the very broad spectrum of photography of the past.
Logged

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: PDN PhotoPlus 2013
« Reply #79 on: November 04, 2013, 03:49:34 pm »

Before they were a soulless computer with a lens they were a soulless machine, especially suited to modernist portrayal of the machine age. But once we shake-on that retro pixie-dust... :-)

And before "full frame" became the object of Big Sensor fetishist desire it was a miniature format.   :o

-Dave-
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Up