Guest stnami Posted March 6, 2011 Share #1 Posted March 6, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) With so few posts about printing on LUF most images produced by posters here remain as screen images. The wwwdot world's IQ needs are not that high .................... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Hi Guest stnami, Take a look here IQ a myth on LUF. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pico Posted March 6, 2011 Share #2 Posted March 6, 2011 True. I have a 30" monitor and would welcome larger images, but even then it is not at all like a print. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted March 6, 2011 Share #3 Posted March 6, 2011 You can look at screen images all day -and enjoy the experience- but a well made print is in another league. Books can come a reasonable second, but second none the less. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted March 6, 2011 Share #4 Posted March 6, 2011 It is digital running the show but I guess that was too hard for some to understand......... not about customers . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 6, 2011 Share #5 Posted March 6, 2011 Matter of tastes. Always preferred trannies when i shot film and i still prefer screen now that i shoot digital. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted March 7, 2011 Share #6 Posted March 7, 2011 Buying sensor lens combinations that out resolve screen images seems a waste.......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 7, 2011 Share #7 Posted March 7, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Resolution is not an aim for everybody Imants. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillCB Posted March 7, 2011 Share #8 Posted March 7, 2011 Buying sensor lens combinations that out resolve screen images seems a waste.......... You're right - unless you're going to print there is little point in using ANY high res camera, let alone Leica. A 72 dpi image on screen will never reveal Leica resolution. Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted March 7, 2011 Share #9 Posted March 7, 2011 You're right - unless you're going to print there is little point in using ANY high res camera, let alone Leica. A 72 dpi image on screen will never reveal Leica resolution. Bill 72 ppi is long gone. Make a 720 pixel wide image and measure it with a ruler. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted March 7, 2011 Share #10 Posted March 7, 2011 It has been always a concern, that simple web display just doesn't make qualities in many photos visible. Web size pictures are indeed just mediocre thumbnails. Photos, that work already as thumbs do look nice on the web, photos, that show fine detail or even hide detail in the measly web size just don't look great on the web (or are just bad pictures to start with). I always enjoy spending time in galleries, observing photographs at print size (A4 or bigger). It is absolutely amazing, how much detail even a bigger print, shot with those lovely Leica lenses reveals, when going over it with a loupe. Most people, who see pictures never will experience this, I am afraid. When I shot an event with people, I share the photos afterwards in print form - it is amazing, to see their reactions, holding their pictures in their hands, seeing things, they just never see on the computer, as they click away. Print is, what cameras are made for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted March 7, 2011 Share #11 Posted March 7, 2011 It's intensely depressing that this thread has less than half the posts than one about shoulder straps...I'm with Imants on this. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted March 7, 2011 Share #12 Posted March 7, 2011 It's intensely depressing that this thread has less than half the posts than one about shoulder straps...I'm with Imants on this. Regards, Bill I would imagine Leica would have been bankrupt long ago if they relied on people who take pictures of any quality for sales, Leica perhaps more than any other company has always attracted people who care more about kit than images... And those who DO appreciate the quality of the lenses especially can live off the fat produced by the equipment enthusiasts, not that there isn't a bit af that in all of us I think Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted March 7, 2011 Share #13 Posted March 7, 2011 Oh quite, and the irony of my posting in the thread to which I refer is not lost. But it's all about balance, and sometimes I think the balance around here tips just a little too far in favour of the bag & strap fetishising/pixel-peeping/ruler-snapping/worried-about-a-scratch/where's-the-firmware-update/I-want-the-NEXT-thing-and-I-want-it-NOW brigade. Cameras are for taking pictures - aren't they? Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted March 7, 2011 Share #14 Posted March 7, 2011 Oh quite, and the irony of my posting in the thread to which I refer is not lost. But it's all about balance, and sometimes I think the balance around here tips just a little too far in favour of the bag & strap fetishising/pixel-peeping/ruler-snapping/worried-about-a-scratch/where's-the-firmware-update/I-want-the-NEXT-thing-and-I-want-it-NOW brigade. Cameras are for taking pictures - aren't they? Regards, Bill Bill, I frequent different internet fora, but LUF for me is almost exclusively used in a gear centric fashion. Very little do I post photographs here or take part in discussions about them. I don't have a gallery here and don't intent to. The LUF is pure gear talk for me. On other boards, I enjoy, to discuss photos, which is not much these days though. This is not to say, that it is negative in any way - I enjoy it, the way it is - LUF = gear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 7, 2011 Share #15 Posted March 7, 2011 A pity about Andreas' effort to provide photoforums - the link to them seems to be disabled on some computers - Now if everybody who is complaining here about the gear-oriented aspects of this forum or about the low level of the work posted started participating there with brilliant images and educative critique the problem would be solved - we might even evolve to exihibitions of the work of LUF members... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted March 7, 2011 Share #16 Posted March 7, 2011 Leica perhaps more than any other company has always attracted people who care more about kit than images... Not sure that its confined to Leica but that said I do find bag/strap/case threads pretty boring (or would if I bothered to read them). I suppose these items are 'kit' and I do use them but can't get hung up on the ummmm, technical differences myself. To go back to stnami's point, its true that vast numbers of images are only ever seen on the web, but when prints are required then IQ is important (so I'm not sure about the word myth - irrelevance might be more appropriate?). I would say that probably at least 99% of all digital cameras are used well below their capabilities but for the remainder, IQ is/may/can be important. That said I use an M camera largely because of its size and weight and more importantly, because I actually enjoy doing so and I have no hesitation in saying that the lenses deliver which I cannot always say for some of my other lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted March 7, 2011 Share #17 Posted March 7, 2011 Since 2005/6 the cameras have got better, monitors are better, resolution is better etc but it seems there is little improvement in the photographers ................ lots of IQ talk and the Digital Post Processing Forum is a white elephant most of the time where even mice fear to tread Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aesop Posted March 7, 2011 Share #18 Posted March 7, 2011 ...being unashamedly hard-boiled, cynical and thoroughly Monday-averse, I was just wondering if the thread title was intentionaly left "open". Imants? Then again, it may be the lack of caffeine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 7, 2011 Share #19 Posted March 7, 2011 I've given this subject some thought....although I'm not sure if this is a thread about the apparent reduction in printed output due to digital imaging, or a photography v gearhead thread...... It does seem that there are many photographers and happy snappers out there now who shoot digitally and only ever view/share their work via computer screens. Prints are very rarely made if at all. Flickr and Facebook are the way to go. Happy snappers are likely to view on phone screens. However, how much of a change does this really represent? Back in the day when one would drop the film off at a local processors, then pick up a wallet of 36 6X4's, how many of those images were printed any bigger? If one did ones own D&P, I suspect even fewer images were printed. Contacts then a few 5X7's or 10X8's of the better ones. How many people regularly printed high (tecnical) quality 16X20's ? Those who shot slides, lovely lovely slides, and viewed them on a projector screen did benefit from the impact of a big image and quality mattered. How many were printed though? True, if you're going to share 99% of your output digitally then much of the quality of Leica gear is wasted, you don't need all that resolution, all those megapixels, unless you want to pixel peep every image, and that could of course be the problem. I agree that it would be great to see more discussion of imagery and processing skills on the forum, but people get so damn touchy if you dare to offer any kind of feedback which isn't of the 'great shot, lovely colours, nice bokeh' type. Say that you think an image could be improved, however you justify it, and be prepared for the backlash! I view the photos but rarely comment now. We have tried to encourage more open discussions about work posted here, but it invariably ends in the usual childish name calling and table thumping. Maybe - again - Andreas should consider an additional 'critique' forum for those actively seeking feedback on their work? (for those with thick skins only!). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 7, 2011 Share #20 Posted March 7, 2011 A pity about Andreas' effort to provide photoforums - the link to them seems to be disabled on some computers - How can that be? They are just normal sub-sections of the forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.