Guest Ming Rider Posted May 24, 2012 Share #161 Posted May 24, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I stand amazed. That wooden frame is surely a thing of beauty. I'm assuming there's a mechanical advantage to using wood, not just 'because they can' ? Controlled frame flex maybe? Just noticed the wood continues along the trailing arms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 24, 2012 Posted May 24, 2012 Hi Guest Ming Rider, Take a look here Is it time to stop regarding film as the benchmark for B&W?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AlanG Posted May 24, 2012 Share #162 Posted May 24, 2012 I stand amazed. That wooden frame is surely a thing of beauty. I'm assuming there's a mechanical advantage to using wood, not just 'because they can' ? Controlled frame flex maybe? Just noticed the wood continues along the trailing arms. Well that company is into wood but frames with various stiffness/flex characteristics can be made with various materials. You can spend $600 on a bike saddle, $600 on pedals, and $250 on a short sleeve jersey. And that is before you get into computerized power training devices. I think all the frames in the Tour de France and similar races are carbon fiber but the bikes must have a traditional shape and can't weigh less than 15lbs even though lighter bikes are possible. You might be amazed at what is going on with something as mundane as a bicycle and how similar bike forums are to this one. The posts run along the exact same lines on slightly different subjects. Traditional steel frames vs. carbon fiber = film vs. digital. Resolution on a lens is the same as weigh savings on a bike. (Neither really matters that much for typical users in the real world but it is great to spend a lot of money on them.) This one is 2.7kg and costs about $45,000. World’s Lightest Bike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
espresso Posted May 24, 2012 Share #163 Posted May 24, 2012 you can´t compare film to your old alan thingie, can you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 24, 2012 Share #164 Posted May 24, 2012 you can´t compare film to your old alan thingie, can you? You can't ride that bike while carrying a digital camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted May 24, 2012 Share #165 Posted May 24, 2012 I have a 20 year old Moser Pro with a few thousand km under its wheels. Chips off the paint, and covered in road grime. I use it for my morning ride - smooth and totally reliable. The frame is double butted steel (well, chromoly), light and flexible (compared to aluminium and carbon). I love this bike - stripped of everything but a drink bottle cage and LED lights. Fast and comfortable, and very "old school", apparently. My new Niner 29er hardtail is a different kettle of fish altogether. Reverting to topic for a moment, it's all very well drawing comparisons to old Masters (Luigi makes a valid point on this), but with the M Monochrom we are still talking about a mechanical shutter. The only change is replacing the emulsion and chemical developing with a digital sensor. A better analogy would be the Impressionists having pre-made paints in pig's bladders enabling them to paint in situ, as opposed to the laborious task of mixing paints in the studio the way the Dutch Masters had to. Romanticism about the content and style of the time of the artist is one thing. All we are looking at is one, albeit significant, change in a process that is otherwise remaining pretty much the same. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
espresso Posted May 25, 2012 Share #166 Posted May 25, 2012 You can't ride that bike while carrying a digital camera. i wouldn´t ride that bike carrying anything. while there certainly is lots of nostalgic fun about owning the bike, the riding must feel kinda stone age. ("hey, flintstone, slam that faster gear in, willya!") sorry, just exaggerating a little. in cycling i never got the idea of using obsolete technique. i ride not even aluminum, but steel.my betty leeds ( Betty Leeds | cycles for heroes ) with ultegra 2x10 makes me feel very post-carbon. in picture taking i still love and use film (b&w). it´s not obsolete, just different, as a craftsman i find the darkroom process more appealing than lightroom-clicking. no second thoughts about film supply etc. as long as there is, there is. and my m9 is a pure pleasure to shoot with, it´s the betty leeds of photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
espresso Posted May 25, 2012 Share #167 Posted May 25, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) The frame is double butted steel (well, chromoly), light and flexible (compared to aluminium and carbon). Cheers John aluminum certainly is lighter (except for the alan thingie, maybe), carbon definitely is both lighter and more flexible, so to speak. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted May 25, 2012 Share #168 Posted May 25, 2012 Trig points are usually stone pillars about 4 feet tall, often on the tops of mountains. They will inevitably have a benchmark in the side, and also have a plate on the top of the column. But haven't they been joined by extremely accurate (digital) beacons? I believe that there is one not far from where I live with positional accuracy within the sub-millimeter range. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 25, 2012 Share #169 Posted May 25, 2012 I am sure they have, but they remain there as part of our "analogue" heritage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 25, 2012 Share #170 Posted May 25, 2012 i ride not even aluminum, but steel.my betty leeds ( Betty Leeds | cycles for heroes ) with ultegra 2x10 makes me feel very post-carbon. See. Bike discussions are just like photo discussions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
espresso Posted May 25, 2012 Share #171 Posted May 25, 2012 See. Bike discussions are just like photo discussions. right. the boring knowall experts just agree, while us wannabe experts can discuss endlessly. btw, while i wouldn´t ride your bike, i really like the looks of it. it´s like the ultimate flashy result of time reverse engineering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted May 25, 2012 Share #172 Posted May 25, 2012 I think this MM/SummicronAA shot looks great: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/240234-miami-living-m-monochrome.html (posted in the Photo forum here) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TshawM8 Posted May 25, 2012 Share #173 Posted May 25, 2012 Annndd Ellie scores a point for bringing the thread back to its intended purpose. I, however, will balance it out by saying that the frame posted is gorgeous. The lightest bike in the world, although beautifuly designed, seems a bit pointless though. Im sure its fun to ride. I ride a felt myself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted May 25, 2012 Share #174 Posted May 25, 2012 So I just got done souping my last roll of black and white shot in Canyonlands, Utah of the recent solar eclipse. My wife and I used a D800 in raw, Chamonix 4x5 field camera and a Hasselblad 501 C/M. The 4x5 was loaded with Tmax-100, the Hasselblad with Acros 100. We had both a cloud and a contrail cover the sun right at peak, making it light the cloud up like a light bulb, tough lighting. I had to use two 3 stop ND grad filter to even get it remotely in range of the foreground of the canyon below. Now, normally, I am really impressed with the highlight retention ability of the D800, but the sun lighting up the cloud was just too much, even in the darker brackets. The TMax 100 was a bit too contrasty as well even with a more dilute developer combo, not a very forgiving film for black and white. So with one more chance at revealing a printable shot, I went well outside the normal development with the Acros and used a super dilute ratio of Rodinal at 1+200 for a whopping 26 minute development time... The negatives are perfect, will print really well. After seeing this amazing ability to render a huge range of light, I can say without hesitation that black and white film, not some digital camera, is the benchmark of black and white photography. You can see the image on APUG in the gallery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 25, 2012 Share #175 Posted May 25, 2012 right. the boring knowall experts just agree, while us wannabe experts can discuss endlessly. btw, while i wouldn´t ride your bike, i really like the looks of it. it´s like the ultimate flashy result of time reverse engineering. No, what I'm getting at is that pretty much all bikes can be fun to ride and many simply serve their purpose as transportation. Just like using a camera. But the tiniest details eventually rear their heads and cause endless discussion even though in practice they are usually trivial unless you are a racer. (Or very particular needs as a photographer.) I get on either the ALAN bike or my "modern" CF bike and don't see much difference in performance or pleasure. And I have a modern Ultegra equipped aluminum cyclocross bike that I ride and enjoy almost every day as a commuter on gravel trails despite it being heavier than my 21 lb ALAN bike. (More like 30-50 lbs if I'm carrying stuff.) I don't think I understand what "time reverse engineering' means. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 25, 2012 Share #176 Posted May 25, 2012 The negatives are perfect, will print really well. After seeing this amazing ability to render a huge range of light, I can say without hesitation that black and white film, not some digital camera, is the benchmark of black and white photography. Yes but that was medium format and 4x5. You didn't try a 9.5mm Minox too did you? Of course film can handle overexposure much better than digital. Plus X was pretty much made for it. I first thought live view would be a good way to shoot sunsets as it keeps you from staring directly into the sun when framing a photo. But I just read in the 5DIII camera manual a warning not to point the camera towards the sun in live view mode as that can damage the electronics and could "char" the lightweight advanced technology shutter curtains. I don't know if digital Leicas have similar warnings but other than pinholes, I think film cameras are ok. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted May 25, 2012 Share #177 Posted May 25, 2012 aluminum certainly is lighter (except for the alan thingie, maybe), carbon definitely is both lighter and more flexible, so to speak. Depends upon the carbon fiber and construction. Some is flexible, most is quite stiff, and there are profound differences in design and construction. Bear with me - where I worked we had a composites engineering division, factory, lab and all. The front forks on my bike are super rigid CF; so much so that I am thinking of installing a head buffer to save my hands. OBPHOTO - Not all CF tripods are good. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
espresso Posted May 26, 2012 Share #178 Posted May 26, 2012 I don't think I understand what "time reverse engineering' means. sorry, a bad joke. the art of making things that look like coming out of the past, something like that. agreed- you can have fun with very different things, bikes or cameras, if you´re just used to them. and fun is, at least for me, the main drive for cycling or picture taking. not how fast i can go on the treadly or how many mps my cam can resolve, but the pure pleasure of handling a device i like and getting the results i like. i appreciate you´re a bike commuter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
espresso Posted May 26, 2012 Share #179 Posted May 26, 2012 Depends upon the carbon fiber and construction. Some is flexible, most is quite stiff, and there are profound differences in design and construction. Bear with me - where I worked we had a composites engineering division, factory, lab and all. The front forks on my bike are super rigid CF; so much so that I am thinking of installing a head buffer to save my hands. OBPHOTO - Not all CF tripods are good. . amazing. in the 12 years i rode cf road bikes i always found them comfier than the rest, especially the forks, as the main frame as a 3d- construction is very limited in it´s damping abilities, except for the trek y-foil i had. still got a nice, light cf fork on my steel bike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ming Rider Posted May 26, 2012 Share #180 Posted May 26, 2012 Yes but that was medium format and 4x5. You didn't try a 9.5mm Minox too did you? Of course film can handle overexposure much better than digital. Plus X was pretty much made for it. I first thought live view would be a good way to shoot sunsets as it keeps you from staring directly into the sun when framing a photo. But I just read in the 5DIII camera manual a warning not to point the camera towards the sun in live view mode as that can damage the electronics and could "char" the lightweight advanced technology shutter curtains. I don't know if digital Leicas have similar warnings but other than pinholes, I think film cameras are ok. Moderators, moderators !!! There's people talking about photography on this forum again !!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.