but is it a 'pro' camera

so i have been noodling around with the m8 for a bit--very nice with its warts and all. but i started thinking, "would i use it for a pro magazine assignment?" image-wise, I think a file would hold up to most mag's standards (with the exception being those that demand much larger files) but what if an editor demanded I send him the raw file? do I send in one from a Leica and hope they know what to do with it? Obviously not an issue sending in a Canon or Nikon file--they are used to them. anyone had experience with this issue? Some will take jpegs--so no issue, but if they want to run large they typically ask for the file right out of camera.

[Skippy Sanchez]

Yes.

Most any magazine editor is accustomed to seeing a quality image in a raw file, and the people working with those files probably know more about extracting an image for their publication than we do.

It isn't any different than when, just a few short eons ago, an editor wanted the film (which, incidentally, was always returned at the photographer's request).

At the dawn of digital imaging, about 5-10 years ago, I had an assignment that I felt I had blown big time, and when i sent the files on a CD I apologized profusely, offered to re-shoot and said they were under no obligation to pay. Three days later I got an email and the editor said her lab folks were able to work with the images and said my check was in the mail. I was absolutely amazed at how good the picturers looked when I saw the magazine a couple months later in the grocery store.

so, yes, indeed. give mag editors & their cronies some credit. The usually know what they're doing with your raw files.

[WPalank]

Originally Posted by Skippy Sanchez

people working with those files probably know more about extracting an image for their publication than we do.

I totally disagree with this statement! I think many photographers are well trained in image capture, but when it comes to working in PS or other image processing programs they are very untrained. I would suggest getting trained in Photoshop the same way you did in Photography. Classes and more classes. It's never to late to learn, no matter what your resume is in film and slide capture.
Joining organizations like NAPP and going to their Photoshop Worlds or getting their online training. You need to be trained on the difference of sharpening an image for online publication compared to a magazine publication for example.

Nobody experienced the light that day like you did!

[Skippy Sanchez]

Originally Posted by WPalank

I totally disagree with this statement! I think many photographers are well trained in image capture, but when it comes to working in PS or other image processing programs they are very untrained. I would suggest getting trained in Photoshop the same way you did in Photography. Classes and more classes. It's never to late to learn, no matter what your resume is in film and slide capture.
Joining organizations like NAPP and going to their Photoshop Worlds or getting their online training. You need to be trained on the difference of sharpening an image for online publication compared to a magazine publication for example.

Nobody experienced the light that day like you did!

I guess I don't follow why you disagree, because what you say is precisely what I mean.

Yes, "many photographers are well trained in image capture, but when it comes to working in PS or other image processing programs they are very untrained." Post processing (film/print/digital/etc.) is the second half of photography; capability in only the first half does not a photographer make.

On the other hand, no one at Magnum or National Geographic does their own post processing, but they know how. Sabastiao Salgado knows how to print, but doesn't.

My point, however, is that magazines (usually) have image editors on staff who are trained and generally more capable with photoshop than most photographers. And they know & understand their magazine's standards, press settings, have their monitors calibrated to match output to press, etc.etc.

The question was whether we should trust sending M8 raw files to magazines because they may not know how to handle them, compared to Nikon or Canon. Most high-end magazine will only accept raw files, whether the photographer knows photoshop or not, and they know how to work with them.

[scottv]

Aye, I process raw files using ACR in CS3 then from Tools in Bridge, use image processor to batch lo res pictures. Jpegs indicating how raw should look... submit to editor

However there can be a slip betwixt cup and lip or somethign to that effect...

Scott

http://www.scottvenning.co.nz

[girphoto]

Originally Posted by localplayer

so i have been noodling around with the m8 for a bit--very nice with its warts and all. but i started thinking, "would i use it for a pro magazine assignment?" image-wise, I think a file would hold up to most mag's standards (with the exception being those that demand much larger files) but what if an editor demanded I send him the raw file? do I send in one from a Leica and hope they know what to do with it? Obviously not an issue sending in a Canon or Nikon file--they are used to them. anyone had experience with this issue? Some will take jpegs--so no issue, but if they want to run large they typically ask for the file right out of camera.

I think you all missed the point and question!
Is the M8 a pro Camera and will editors use the images from it, Raw or otherwise.

The answer is simple, YES, the M8 is not a toy, it is not a PHD camera it is a PRO TOOL and in the right hands, can make great images.

The Files out of the M8 are large and I do not know any professional editor, that would not be happy to receive a Leica Image.

Again, this should become another tool in you professional working bag.

Gary
Gary I. Rothstein, Photography

folks, my point is that when i get an frantic call (probably due to deadline issues) for an image a mag wants to run large--they demand the 'out of the camera' image. this has nothing to do with my lack of PhotoShop skills or other post processing--the real world doesn't work that way. okay, i KNOW they have really smart people who can p/s the heck out of stuff to make it press ready, but i am not sure if i ftp them a leica raw file they will be ready for it. at this point i probably would only send an out of camera large jpeg. i guess i just need to simply call a few of the mags i deal with and ask them--but i afraid of what the response will be if i say i am shooting an m8. my point of the thread was to see if others had run into the issue with their raw submissions.

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by localplayer

folks, my point is that when i get an frantic call (probably due to deadline issues) for an image a mag wants to run large--they demand the 'out of the camera' image. this has nothing to do with my lack of PhotoShop skills or other post processing--the real world doesn't work that way. okay, i KNOW they have really smart people who can p/s the heck out of stuff to make it press ready, but i am not sure if it ftp them a leica raw file they will be ready for it. at this point i probably would only send an out of camera large jpeg. i guess i just need to simply call a few of the mags i deal with and ask them--but i afraid of what the response will be if i say i am shooting an m8. my point of the thread was to see if others had run into the issue with their raw submissions.

I always find these threads problematic, as the definition of 'pro' is so nebulous. Still, if you want to send the DNG file to a magazine, it is a DNG file - if they have CS3 (and why would they not) then they can read it and use it.

best wishes

good point, probably shouldn't use the word "pro" as it seems to imply that if it isn't then it must be inferior. I should also spend the bucks and get a later version photoshop--just hate that bridge stuff

thanks for your reply. btw, assuming editors have the latest version may also be problematic, but will cross that 'bridge' when i get there.

[Jamie Roberts]

to hijack the thread--

The bet is that they will have either CS3 (which runs exactly a gajillion times better and faster than CS2), CS2 with the right ACR, or even Lightroom or C1, probably in that order.

However, in my limited magazine and experience, no-one has ever passed up a 16bpp TIFF file in a wide colour space. That's what I'd offer if asked.

[ken_tanaka]

Bob's actual question is distinct from the title he assigned to this thread (which has no real meaning or answer).

I have never been asked for a raw file for publication and don't expect to be asked. Editors and book designers generally want drop-in simplicity and fidelity. Given the rather standardized and careless manner in which nearly all books and magazines are printed an 8-bit sRGB file would be more than sufficient for most publications.

Jamie's oblique suggestion is, in my opinion, very on-target; be prepared to provide 16-bit TIFFs and you'll have your bases covered for publications.

yep tiff should do...but i do get asked for out of camera--"send the file right off the card, don't touch it" stuff like this though, and the m8 won't be getting the assignment. However it is a 'pro camera' for what it does I suppose:

[jaapv]

Hey! Those should be in the Apo-Telyt aka Tele thread! Impressive shots!

[cam2000]

When I do a job for a mag or newspaper...... I will do the finish images (color balance and retouched) according to there size and specs they need then save it as a Tif include in a seperate folder will be the RAW or DNG burn it to a CD or DVD and send it off or dowload it to there server. I prefer keeping control of my image and not have someonelse handling it after all I shot it and saw the colors and the lighting better than the guy sitting at the computer..... I can honestly say that the M8 will do an excellent job.... as good or better than my prior D2X.

[tummydoc]

I rang up a couple of my "pro" acquaintances who shoot for publication and they said not only have they never been asked to submit a RAW file, they are prohibited from doing so. TIFF if the files can be delivered on disk, JPEG if the files must be transmitted electronically, as in remote location shots of time-sensitive subjects. S

[WPalank]

I have never submitted for the publication, but I believe National Geographic only accepts RAW files (and I would imagine DNG) from their "pros".

[afineman]

Don't send your RAW files to your clients. It is not a professional way of doing business. Charge them for processing and process the file into a TIF or JPG. Most editors at publications don't even have properly calibrated computer monitors. If you do send a RAW file then a DNG would be best, you can make minor adjustments and they will stay with the file when you send it, unlike nikon and canon files.

[khun_k]

Yes, I suppose M8 will be in the class considered good enough for a regular format magazine. At least I will not hesitate to use for certain assignment that M8 fits.
I am not so sure if it is necessary to send raw file, at least I won't and was never required to. Not because my raw file may not be good enough, but I want to control the file not to be processed to a look that I may disagree, taste is a subjective issue and photographer has the right to know how their image will look when published. I shoot mostly raw, convert them, layer adjustment in my own workflow, then I flattened the image to save in jpg or tiff or cmyk file to the editor.
National Geography will use processed file but they will also like to see raw so they are certain the file was not manipulated or modified. White balance adjustment, tonal adjustment, color adjustment, sharpening should be considered within photography control. While to photoshop a dog sad, pig smile, cow fly should be use for commercial advertising or creative graphic materials, not for national Geography, I supposed.

[farnz]

Originally Posted by localplayer

...but i do get asked for out of camera--"send the file right off the card, don't touch it" stuff like this though ...

Might it be that they're expecting jpegs and are aware that the jpeg compression algorithm will destroy data every time they're saved?

Pete.

[etrigan63]

A camera does not a "pro" make. A "pro" is determined by the skill with which one wields the tools of his/her craft. A camera is just that: a tool. A "pro" learns the limits of his gear and knows how to use to craft the image he/she visualizes.

Cameras have different capabilities. Knowing these capabilities and how to take advantage of them allows one to get the most out of his gear. A "pro" can get a great shot with a shoebox and a pin.

Can you do professional quality work with an M8? Yes.
Can you send DNG files if requested? Yes, all major post-processing software can handle them.
Should you do it? If you feel confident about your work, yes.