Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Garrett  Being as a majority of my photography is mobile, I am not interested in a mechanical 4 X 5 film camera. I struggle with my longest lens attached to a 40D ! |
Ronald, I had made the point as a serious suggestion. Not because I think you should change your methods. It is just that a large format camera requires that you understand the process of image capture. No buttons to press by mistake, and there is not 500 custom functions. Hire a studio with the kit for a day and make a few images.
The suggestion was made in an effort to put you in touch with the process. It is likely that you would only create 5 images during an 8 hour day but you would be sure that the images were in focus, super sharp, well lit and could not be made at a wedding by one of your client's guests; using a cell phone.
Transparencies from a 4 x 5 inch monorail would knock your socks off. If high quality is what differentiates the pros from the rest, then 4x 5 inch has that in spades. The problem with the wide acceptance of digital imaging is that we all seem to be prepared to accept what is good enough rather than striving for the very best. I understand the bit about only doing enough to secure the sale but with every film camera capable of achieving similar results, the pressure was on the photographer to produce nothing but the best work possible.
For me that meant hand printing my own colour work so that I could exercise the same degree of control over the final image, as I could with my mono work. this was despite the advent and the proliferation of RA4 processors.
Quote:
|
My question about complexity was aimed at the fact that some operators manuals are 400 / 500 pages long now. Heck there are people that spend their entire lifetime learning how to use all the features of Photoshop, and new "secrets" are still being found!
|
Hmmm... My Canon 1D2 instruction manual is 178 pages long. My spies tell me that 196 pages are contained in the manual for your EOS 40D.
This is notwithstanding that fact that my own !D2 manual measures about A6 in size. 105 x 150mm and if it was an A4 (297 x 210mm) publication its page count could have been cut to a mere 45 pages. The only other manuals that I have seen that have page counts anywhere near the figure which you have suggested is a fact, are the multi-lingual versions of a technical manual.
Quote:
|
Some cameras now have the ability to take a picture when the subject smiles.
|
So would those cameras make an image if they were to focus on a laughing hyena or a grinning chimp? [/tongue in cheek]
Quote:
|
I feel like I need to stay on top of the newest technology because to be able to sell an image here or there, I must be able to deliver what the general public can't.
|
I agree with you, Ronald, about delivering what the public cannot. I don't feel that keeping up with the newest technology adds anything to my ability to create well exposed, in focus (or differential focussed) images. I can shoot on manual, meter my own exposures and have no need to rely on automation. The only custom function I have invoked is to remove the AF from the shutter release and place it on the
* button.
Quote:
|
I guess the point about manual "techinical cameras" should make me glad for all the automation now? Noel would prolly like the old mechanical cameras as it looks like more "fiddling" was actually needed then than now.
|
When there was only mechanical 35mm cameras, all users at all levels were able to focus, meter for the exposure and create acceptable images. The degree of automation in current cameras leaves some of my younger colleagues floundering when something has failed and they do know know what effect each of the myriad functions has on the final image. I am not a Luddite and I have embraced digital imaging because it was difficult not to see how things were going.
To read about the ensuing problems with the technology is my cue that all is not quite as simple as the "you just press the button and print the image", sort of philosophy that appears to go along with digital imaging.
Glad to be of service (with apologies to Douglas Adams)
Jeff
Linear Mode
