I new, here, so bare with me. I had a portrait studio thru 2000. The time I closed down my studio(had baby) was just about the time digital was starting to take over. I always shot Medium Format (Mamiya645)as I sold large wall portraits.
I'm now wanting to reopen a studio. Since I've been out of the biz, for quite some time, many things have changed. As I'm starting to research cameras/equiptment I have a few questions. Any input would be GREATLY appreciated. Basically, I don't have a complete understanding of dig. cameras and their capabilities. Do dig. cameras come in 35mm and medium format? With a 35mm dig. camera how large of an image can be made before becoming grainy? I know I would never go larger than 16x20 with a 35mm film. That was if perfectly exposed and focused. Are the 35mm dig cameras so much better that you can create an image larger than 16x20? If not, am I best to stick with Med.Format(film) camera. I'm guessing that pro photograhers are shooting with Digital Med./Large format.
I would really appreciate any info as I'm trying to figure out the best place to start.
I feel so out of touch, at the moment, with the craft that I've always been so familiar.
Thanks for taking the time to read my post!.....Trish
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
The most popular studio portrait cameras are probably the Canon 5D and now 5DM2. Properly exposed & with a bit of Photoshop work you can make an excellent 24x36 easily and many of us go much larger. Even a 50D can print to those sizes but you may find the smaller viewfinder (smaller sendor than the 5D) a bit of a challenge at first if you are used to MF cameras.
The biggest challenge is workflow and getting used to hours in front of the computer instead of the customer.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Thanks so much for your reply. I'm not well versed in photoshop at all and frankly don't care to learn the program. I know, I know "how can any photographer, today, not need photoshop knowledge." I've always used a lab in Minn., Herff Jones. They've always done a great job in every aspect of printing etc. So my question, now, to you would be this: You're telling me that you can create quality 24x36 images, with the Canon 5DM2. However, this can require hours working in Photoshop.
How much time would a pro lab spend creating the same quality sized image? I realize they can do this at a price, of course. I guess I need to talk to some of the customer serv. rep's at the lab to get a better idea of cost. Am I better off, not having Photoshop knowledge, staying with Med. Format? If so, is it necessary to go Med. Format digital? I would think going Med. Format digital is the preferred format because of all the conveniences digital offers. Med. Format film is not going to give me any lesser quality; just not nearly as convenient. Am I on the right track in my understanding of dig. vs. film? Thanks, Doug! I really appreciate your help and knowledge!!! Trish
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Get the exposure right and you can print quite nice prints - even big ones - right from the files the camera gives you.
It's when you want to tweak things to get the penultimate image that the digital editing software comes into play.
Most of us do digital editing - personally I'm a Photoshop nut - but it's not by definition required as you might be thinking. Do the same things you'd do with a film camera - i.e., get the metering set up and the camera set right and your out-of-camera images can be extraordinary. Now, you could end up wanting to tweak this or that sooner or later, and you'll probably find yourself doing some digital editing. You could start with Photoshop Elements (inexpensive but surprisingly capable) and work from there.
I suggest you find a good sample 5D Mark II out-of-camera JPEG image online (I'm sure they're out there) and just upload it to a print lab - e.g., Winkflash - and see what the print looks like. You may be surprised.
Am I better off, not having Photoshop knowledge, staying with Med. Format? If so, is it necessary to go Med. Format digital? I would think going Med. Format digital is the preferred format because of all the conveniences digital offers. Med. Format film is not going to give me any lesser quality; just not nearly as convenient. Am I on the right track in my understanding of dig. vs. film? Thanks, Doug! I really appreciate your help and knowledge!!! Trish
If you go digital, you will require some knowledge and tools to work with the digital images regardless of format. These may include Photoshop and one of several raw conversion softwares if you decide to get the most out of the medium. I'd suggest you start with Lightroom and add further skills and software as the need arises.
Mike.
__________________ Mike Adelaide
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
It's a fact of the 21st century photographer's life that you have to spend as much time in front of a computer screen as behind the camera. Pity but there it is. No choice.
If you're new to digital what I suggest is that you get yourself a good P&S camera like a Canon G10 or Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 & go out & take a few thousand images of everything around you. Use RAW if you can.
I think that you need to learn the basics of several software packages. Photoshop is very expensive.
When you buy a Canon camera you get DPP for free. Also as Noel said Elements is cheap & provides many of the features that are really good for learning.
You might want to consider a high end RAW developer, like Capture1. They make a limited version (LE) & a Pro version with the best features.
Read the manuals of the cameras (the G10 one is only 304 pages) but you need to read it. All digital cameras are fiendishly complex devices with dozens (up to hundreds) of custom function settings.
Do all this before even attempting any prints.
Good luck.
__________________ Cheers
Ross
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
I would say that my Nikon D2x, with a 1.5x 12MP sensor, would be make prints on par with a good quality 645 medium format camera, but wouldn't be on par with the prints I got from my old Mamiya RZ-67. I've now just upgraded to a full frame D700, but haven't had a chance to make any large prints from it. Judging from the files, I think it would smoke the 67. The Canon 5D II Would give you even more resolution, but doesn't have the crazy low light capability.
The other big difference that digital brought is that now you can get medium format quality from 35mm situations, so you're seeing far more traditional portraits shot on location than in studios, and with more natural lighting. They're also a lot more dynamic, as now you've got state of the art autofocus and you don't have to change your backs every 10 - 15 shots. It's really a totally different scene than it was 8 or 10 years ago.
The other ting to keep in mind is that unless you learn Photoshop, and learn it good, you're going to be a dead duck. The days of taking a negative to your printer and asking them to burn the background down and dodge the faces, are over.
Digital/Medium Format 
Linear Mode
