Paul J Posted February 1, 2014 Share #61 Posted February 1, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) The only thing separating digital from film these days is good exposure and post production. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Hi Paul J, Take a look here Hasselblad C/M or Leica M-240 for landscape. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
chris_tribble Posted February 1, 2014 Author Share #62 Posted February 1, 2014 Paul - as time goes by, I'm tending to agree. Just for the fun of it I've been re-imagining a batch of work from where I live part of the year (Cumbria in the UK). It's certainly a different perspective to see the work in a 1:1 aspect ratio - and refreshing. A small set can be seen here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ctribble/sets/72157640388560854/. While I certainly can't justify sinking the budget that would be needed to get modern medium or large format digital, I'll continue to investigate ways of delivering 1:1. When I look at some of the crops Pentti Sammallahti gets away with (Pentti Sammallahti - Peter Fetterman), I don't see why I shouldn't have a go Square capture can always come later... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted February 1, 2014 Share #63 Posted February 1, 2014 The only thing separating digital from film these days is good exposure and post production. For you, sure as heck not for everyone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglasf13 Posted February 1, 2014 Share #64 Posted February 1, 2014 Paul - as time goes by, I'm tending to agree. Just for the fun of it I've been re-imagining a batch of work from where I live part of the year (Cumbria in the UK). It's certainly a different perspective to see the work in a 1:1 aspect ratio - and refreshing. A small set can be seen here: The English Lake District - Square experiments - a set on Flickr. While I certainly can't justify sinking the budget that would be needed to get modern medium or large format digital, I'll continue to investigate ways of delivering 1:1. When I look at some of the crops Pentti Sammallahti gets away with (Pentti Sammallahti - Peter Fetterman), I don't see why I shouldn't have a go Square capture can always come later... For square visualization, you could always try a Voigtlander Kontur 1:1 OVF in the hotshoe. Voigtlander made 2 models, and the less common one was made for an 80mm lens on 6x6, which should work great with a 35mm lens on the M9/m240. The top and bottom will be right on, and you'll just have to crop the sides of the image in post to make a square. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted February 1, 2014 Share #65 Posted February 1, 2014 Chris, I believe you will create great images with whatever you choose to use. When the whole film thing sorta imploded on me I was shooting a 6 x 9 alongside an M8. Now that I've had four years to look back on it I don't miss the MF all that much. Sure film can be awesome - so can a good pp'd M8 file. I got to where I could square crop an M8 file, bw convert and have the result similar enough to MF that it made no difference (despite all those film vs digital threads which so populated websites at the time). I wish you all the best in your decision. But it would be some fun to play around with film again under the right circumstances . A second thought addition: I've never arrived at shooting site and then stated "wow, I sure wish I had an MF camera for this". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gilgamesh Posted February 2, 2014 Share #66 Posted February 2, 2014 Jason Larkin | Photographer Chloe Dewe Mathews | Photographer Thomas Gardiner Andrea Gjestvang Panos Pictures - Photo agency specialising in global social issues arjen schmitz photography - architecture - portrait - autonome ARI GABEL Border :: 2005-06 :: mitra tabrizian Just a quick cross section. One issue I should point out is this: Joe Bloggs walks into Dixons, parts with £2K on a 2nd hand 5 Mark11 with a couple of prime lenses, buys Lightroom. Now Joe is batting on the very same playing field as you and me, 'cept we have photography degrees, 20, 30 + years of studying our art form under our individual belts, yet Joe now takes similar images to us both, gets up early for the first light, retires to bed long after the last light. He's on fire! Plus, he has a well paid day job, so spends more £$£ and time and he's producing a cracking set of images and a accompanying website. I know of no other profession that has had the lines so blurred between professional and , amateur. Can you envisage a weekend solicitor, a jobbing dentist, a semi-pro anaesthetist? So what sets your work apart? What is it you do that they can't? What skills do you employ that the weekend warrior simply can't (not without serious effort and training)? That brings me to film. Especially LF. Drum scan a 5x4 neg or even a 6x6/7 cm from a Mamiya 6 or 7 & it knocks a 35mm images into the long grass. Period. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 2, 2014 Share #67 Posted February 2, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Film has become such a tiny part of the business of the few remaining professional processing and printing companies, that I suspect nobody really knows how to operate the equipment properly and has had little practice. Wilson This sounds like another thread about Leica these days. Perhaps the "nobody knows how to operate the equipment properly and has little practice" strikes home to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gilgamesh Posted February 2, 2014 Share #68 Posted February 2, 2014 Ooops - wrong thread! (juggles to pass the time 'til the next response) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted February 2, 2014 Author Share #69 Posted February 2, 2014 Just a quick cross section. ... So what sets your work apart? What is it you do that they can't? What skills do you employ that the weekend warrior simply can't (not without serious effort and training)? That brings me to film. Especially LF. Drum scan a 5x4 neg or even a 6x6/7 cm from a Mamiya 6 or 7 & it knocks a 35mm images into the long grass. Period. Great set of links - many new to me! Thank you. Couldn't agree more with you on the issue of professionalism - though in many ways I'm one of the guilty ones who was given access to pro work precisely because digital eroded the barriers to entry... On your latter point (LF / drum scan etc) a major problem here is finding clients who are willing to pay the price for that. It's getting to the point when it's only the rich amateurs who can afford to draw on this kind of service... But maybe that takes us back to the beginning of photography. So many of those who pushed photography forward were inspired amateurs (Julia Margaret Cameron and Jacques Lartigue as cases in point) - and even Cartier Bresson started off with a silver spoon in his mouth... It's possible that there was a limited time period (roughly from the 1920s to the 1990s) when photography could offer a career for working class men and women - many of whom were trained during time in the military in WW2 or on local newspapers, most of which have now disappeared (along with Time Life, Paris Match etc). These days, a 5D III with 2 or 3 L series zooms (16-35 / 24-70 / 70-90) will keep a roof over the head of a jobbing professional photographer (for whom weddings and events are about the only source of income). LF, drum scans and the like are economically out of the frame... Sorry - I digress. Time to take the camera for a walk. It's stopped raining for the first time in a few days Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 2, 2014 Share #70 Posted February 2, 2014 Paul - as time goes by, I'm tending to agree. Just for the fun of it I've been re-imagining a batch of work from where I live part of the year (Cumbria in the UK). It's certainly a different perspective to see the work in a 1:1 aspect ratio - and refreshing. A small set can be seen here: The English Lake District - Square experiments - a set on Flickr. While I certainly can't justify sinking the budget that would be needed to get modern medium or large format digital, I'll continue to investigate ways of delivering 1:1. When I look at some of the crops Pentti Sammallahti gets away with (Pentti Sammallahti - Peter Fetterman), I don't see why I shouldn't have a go Square capture can always come later... Chris, these are great. Really beautiful shots of really beautiful landscape. I think you are on the right track here, would be great to see more like this. Pentti's work has always been a fascination too, wonderful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 2, 2014 Share #71 Posted February 2, 2014 For you, sure as heck not for everyone. The main problem with digital is there is no limit to adjustment. It's too easy to go too far. It's small adjustments to colour and contrast are all that are needed. It's easy to see good film results and want them, but the process of film\digital workflow is more convoluted and erroneous. Film, exposure, development time temp and agitation, printing, scanning, they are all critical factors, only one needs to be out for it to miss. There are far more variables to not get quite right. Just the scanning process its self is one of the most critical links with good film results; it's easy to get a decent image but not easy to get a perfect image. There aren't many labs who have the expertise required, or the time to do it properly for the crazy low prices they have to charge to be competitive. Scanning is a dying art even at the better labs. My point is, I think going to film, as already stated by someone above, is a whole other learning curve with a lot more factors involved, some of which are really flawed hence the need for digital, and unless you already know it well, I believe you are far better served and it's best to learn to use what you have now, because it's right there and your work will be rewarded in time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted February 2, 2014 Author Share #72 Posted February 2, 2014 I think you are on the right track here, would be great to see more like this. Paul - many thanks for the encouragement. It's given me energy to add some more to this set: The English Lake District - Square experiments - a set on Flickr Time to reflect now, review the archive and to continue to add to it. I'm definitely wanting to spend some more time trying to think B&W and to think square. BTW - one of the discoveries here has been that unless the image has been deliberately envisioned as panoramic, a surprisingly large number of my 3:2 images work really well 1:1. It almost feels as if the images that I feel were well composed in this aspect ration, translate well into 1:1. Conversely, images that I'm not that happy with in 3:2 aren't improved by the 1:1 crop. Odd. So, in terms of the topic of this thread, the discussion so far has encouraged me to believe that it's NOT an either / or issue regarding the M-240 vs Medium Format, and that, for the moment, the M-240 is a fully sufficient tool for the work that I envisage. It's also reminded my that there's still a steep learning curve to climb both in terms of composition and post process (so what's new ). Conclusion? For the moment I think I will be less inclined to allow my eye to be distracted from the goal of learning how to make good photographs by nostalgia for the analogue or the allure of exotic toys. Thank you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJH Posted February 2, 2014 Share #73 Posted February 2, 2014 While I certainly can't justify sinking the budget that would be needed to get modern medium or large format digital Pentax 645D is at a similar price to the M at the moment here in the UK, I don't know if you have considered it or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted February 2, 2014 Author Share #74 Posted February 2, 2014 Pentax 645D is at a similar price to the M at the moment here in the UK, I don't know if you have considered it or not. Aaargh - danger, danger. Best price I can see is around £7000 with kit lens. Nice camera, but I've got too much money sunk in my two M-240 bodies + lenses. I'll pass for the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 2, 2014 Share #75 Posted February 2, 2014 Paul - many thanks for the encouragement. It's given me energy to add some more to this set:The English Lake District - Square experiments - a set on Flickr Time to reflect now, review the archive and to continue to add to it. I'm definitely wanting to spend some more time trying to think B&W and to think square. BTW - one of the discoveries here has been that unless the image has been deliberately envisioned as panoramic, a surprisingly large number of my 3:2 images work really well 1:1. It almost feels as if the images that I feel were well composed in this aspect ration, translate well into 1:1. Conversely, images that I'm not that happy with in 3:2 aren't improved by the 1:1 crop. Odd. So, in terms of the topic of this thread, the discussion so far has encouraged me to believe that it's NOT an either / or issue regarding the M-240 vs Medium Format, and that, for the moment, the M-240 is a fully sufficient tool for the work that I envisage. It's also reminded my that there's still a steep learning curve to climb both in terms of composition and post process (so what's new ). Conclusion? For the moment I think I will be less inclined to allow my eye to be distracted from the goal of learning how to make good photographs by nostalgia for the analogue or the allure of exotic toys. Thank you! Chris these look GREAT, really nice work and some very nice compositions and tonal ranges. Keep it up. I remember voigtlander made an external optical 1:1 finder called a Kontur. May be worth checking out to see if it's something you can adapt to help somehow. I agree about equipment. The thing is, we humans are evolutionary by nature and we want to continually better ourselves. We look at out pictures when they get to a stage where they are looking good and ask - what can I do now? New equipment can definitely open new doors but quite often it's a case of rather than investing a lot money in gear, all that's needed is an investment of our time into learning and new technique. Otr just looking at things a little different as you have just done. It's so easy to think that another piece of gear is going to change things when often all it takes is a change in our selves. Gear is obviously so expensive and it's exceptionally well marketed by some of the best advertising minds out there to make you think you need it or sometimes worse, find a need for it even she you have something that already does the job. Funny that part of the high cost of new gear is actually coming form the cost in marketing it to us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 2, 2014 Share #76 Posted February 2, 2014 Conclusion? For the moment I think I will be less inclined to allow my eye to be distracted from the goal of learning how to make good photographs by nostalgia for the analogue or the allure of exotic toys. Wise words. FWIW I have owned more cameras than I care to count - from 35mm to 5" x 4" - and have sold imagery from all formats for what that's worth. The M8, despite all its 'faults' or 'shortcomings' changed this and I feel that the digital M system has finally allowed me to concentrate on taking images that actually satisfy me. I still understand the allure of beautifully built equipment, the craftsmanship of carefully executed shooting and the desire to operate in ways that have become outdated, but over-riding this is the realisation that photography is about the images one creates. The Leica M system suits me as the relevant tool for what I want to do and I my refinements are now more about limiting what I use than increasing the amount of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted February 2, 2014 Share #77 Posted February 2, 2014 For the moment I think I will be less inclined to allow my eye to be distracted from the goal of learning how to make good photographs by nostalgia for the analogue or the allure of exotic toys. And where is the fun in that?! Being something of a butterfly-photographer, i.e. I flit from subject to subject, ditto with cameras. Sometimes the urge to capture something on a 6x6cm neg pushes me to grab my lightweight Rolleicord Vb and venture forth. The mental adjustments needed to gain the most benefit from the format helps keep me flexible photography-wise and boosts the fun quotient. Then there is the delight of pulling the wet roll of negs of the reel and taking a first quick look at the results. In times long past I used to hanker after a Hasselblad but they were out of my league and I never got beyond a Pentacon 6 and a venerable Mamiya C3. Nowadays it is coping with the weight of the Hasselblad that is beyond me... C'est la vie! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted February 2, 2014 Share #78 Posted February 2, 2014 Looks like this thread was as much an affirmation for you to stick with your M as much as most of its type would be, but then we kind of all knew that is what would happen, lol! But it has also been sort of an affirmation for me too in that dumping digital in favor of the black and white darkroom continues to prove to be the best career move I have ever made. I suppose affirmations are good once and awhile... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted February 2, 2014 Author Share #79 Posted February 2, 2014 Looks like this thread was as much an affirmation for you to stick with your M as much as most of its type would be, but then we kind of all knew that is what would happen, lol! But it has also been sort of an affirmation for me too in that dumping digital in favor of the black and white darkroom continues to prove to be the best career move I have ever made. I suppose affirmations are good once and awhile... Mmm - well I didn't really know where it might end up, and I'm sure that the siren songs from the excellent camera shops (Aperture etc) near my central London home will continue to be a source of temptation. However, I also agree that the result of the discussion has been a re-affirmation of my choice to put my money into digital variants of the M. Next stop could be a set of 1:4 panoramas using the R 28mm f2.8 PC lens... What's not to like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 2, 2014 Share #80 Posted February 2, 2014 Looks like this thread was as much an affirmation for you to stick with your M as much as most of its type would be, but then we kind of all knew that is what would happen, lol! But it has also been sort of an affirmation for me too in that dumping digital in favor of the black and white darkroom continues to prove to be the best career move I have ever made. But you are reading a post in the Leica M (Type 240) 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.