Raw or Jpg with your M with Fotos

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, LeAlain said:

Call me crazy, but the thing is, photography is about photography, it happens in front of you, coincidental or staged, you have to decide whether it is the right light/exposure. Working with jpg means you basically return to the period where you would make a polaroid of a situation, or diapositive (E6), you only get one chance.   I like that. 

It is also similar to negative shooting when you have a lab like Costco print your images.

1 hour ago, LeAlain said:

A Dutch famous photographer (Paul Huf) once said: "when you take a portrait just make one photo, if you need more you waste material (in the days) and you are not focused on what you do." There's a lot of truth in that. And I like the idea you just get one chance.

I do not think that he meant that you should not post-process the image either digitally or in the darkroom.

Ansel Adams has famously said: "The negative is the equivalent of the composer's score, and the print is the performance." Most people prefer to have the Moonlight Sonata played by a gifted pianist rather than by a computer.

However, I do not think there is anything wrong with shooting Polaroids or JPEGs instead of a negative and raw image. But you will lose capabilities with JPEGs: AI NR and highlight recovery are not possible with JPEGs.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[250swb]

2 hours ago, LeAlain said:

As a longtime photographer I have , since digital arrived, allways worked with raw files. Offcourse, as everyone would say.

However, when I got my first Leica last year, the M10 (I mainly use it for B/W), I turned off the RAW and only used the JPG.

Call me crazy, but the thing is, photography is about photography, it happens in front of you, coincidental or staged, you have to decide whether it is the right light/exposure. Working with jpg means you basically return to the period where you would make a polaroid of a situation, or diapositive (E6), you only get one chance.   I like that. 

A Dutch famous photographer (Paul Huf) once said: "when you take a portrait just make one photo, if you need more you waste material (in the days) and you are not focused on what you do." There's a lot of truth in that. And I like the idea you just get one chance.

However, I do see the downside of it, there's a reason I work with raw files, so I might get back to it, especially if I do buy the M11M, to get the max out of it.

boys and girls and others, what are your thoughts?

I think 'you only get one chance' is a myth used by amateurs to big-up their skills while at the same it can be used to excuse them missing the chance. The first thing to consider is that if you look at say Bresson's contact sheets he makes many attempts at getting to the decisive moment, he photographs the scene in front of him until something works. Same for Garry Winogrand, Lee Friedlander, Robert Frank, etc. in fact all the great documentarians and street photographers. The second aspect of 'you only get one chance' when used by a professional photographer is simply the reaction to time and cost, work is for putting food on the table, and the more jobs you can do while spending less money the more food there is for the family. This is also witnessed by professional photographers using a camera until it falls apart while the amateur always 'needs' the next upgrade, of course the exception are professional camera 'influencers' who always need something new.

 

[jaapv]

I doubt that there are many professionals whose main ambition is to put food on the table. There are more lucrative professions. I would suggest that they see their job as way to do what they do best, and are happy that it at least keeps them in peanut butter sandwiches. 

[Chris W]

15 minutes ago, 250swb said:

 The first thing to consider is that if you look at say Bresson's contact sheets he makes many attempts at getting to the decisive moment, he photographs the scene in front of him until something works. Same for Garry Winogrand, Lee Friedlander, Robert Frank, etc. in fact all the great documentarians and street photographers. 

 

Really? Film was expensive. The contact sheets I've seen from the 70's,  professionals are shooting four or five images of the same scene, sometimes only two or three.

Of course the famous NYC street photographers shot one image of each subject as they walked the streets. Other photographers find an amazing scene, then wait until something that grabs them happens. It doesn't mean they are burning through frames, it means they are standing around, waiting for something interesting to happen.

 

https://store.magnumphotos.com/collections/contact-sheets?page=1

Edited September 15 by Chris W

[250swb]

4 hours ago, Chris W said:

Really? Film was expensive. The contact sheets I've seen from the 70's,  professionals are shooting four or five images of the same scene, sometimes only two or three.

Of course the famous NYC street photographers shot one image of each subject as they walked the streets. Other photographers find an amazing scene, then wait until something that grabs them happens. It doesn't mean they are burning through frames, it means they are standing around, waiting for something interesting to happen.

 

https://store.magnumphotos.com/collections/contact-sheets?page=1

Sorry but 'film was expensive'? I was at college in the 1970's and a roll of Tri-X was 35 pence (a pound was 100 pence) from the photography department 'shop'. So film was trade price, and we were encouraged to use five, six, seven, or more films a day (if in 35mm stalking the streets mode), because that is how you learn and also how you begin the realise that 'one chance' is mostly bollocks, the great photographers do it by interrogating the subject. I've got the Magnum contact sheets book, and the images in it don't lie. In your link for Magnum contact sheets Trent Parke used an entire roll on variations of ONE theme! What are you talking about?

[lct]

Photo labs were not cheap in the 70s, especially in color. I would not even dream to have 5 or more K25 or Ekta rolls developed per day. I was not a pro photog though, just a student fortunate enough to be able to afford an M4 and a Summicron 50/2 v3...

Edited September 16 by lct

[Chris W]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, 250swb said:

 In your link for Magnum contact sheets Trent Parke used an entire roll on variations of ONE theme! What are you talking about?

Parke shot those in the last five years. He is an art photographer too.

I think it's common knowledge that film photographers clicked the shutter less than digital photographers where each shot is basically free.

 

[250swb]

2 hours ago, Chris W said:

Parke shot those in the last five years. He is an art photographer too.

I think it's common knowledge that film photographers clicked the shutter less than digital photographers where each shot is basically free.

 

You are conflating practice with the technology as it is today. In the early days the size of digital memory cards didn't allow for a vast amount of 'free' shooting, as memory became bigger and cheaper that allowed more shooting not digital itself. Maybe you also forget the motor-drives on a Press photographers film camera, shooting overhead, shooting a burst as a politician steps out a car, necessary to get 'the shot' and not go back empty handed to the office. Using lots of film in those days was far cheaper than loosing your job and no photo editor begrudged their photographers using too much of it.  

[lct]

27 minutes ago, 250swb said:

You are conflating practice with the technology as it is today. In the early days the size of digital memory cards didn't allow for a vast amount of 'free' shooting

The smaller size of memory cards did allow for many more photos than with film anyway, since cameras where 6mp rather that 60mp then. The files were much smaller accordingly.

[Chris W]

46 minutes ago, 250swb said:

Maybe you also forget the motor-drives on a Press photographers film camera, shooting overhead, shooting a burst as a politician steps out a car, necessary to get 'the shot' and not go back empty handed to the office. Using lots of film in those days was far cheaper than loosing your job and no photo editor begrudged their photographers using too much of it.  

You keep moving the goal posts. You start talking about Winograd, Friedlander, Robert Frank, then you bring up press photographers using motor drives and a contemporary art photographer who is an outlier in their method. 

Yes, street and documentary photographers went back to the same location multiple times, or might find a great location and wait all day until something interesting happened. I don't think many of them just fired off three rolls of 36 exposure in the hopes of seeing something good when they processed them.

[250swb]

1 hour ago, Chris W said:

You keep moving the goal posts. You start talking about Winograd, Friedlander, Robert Frank, then you bring up press photographers using motor drives and a contemporary art photographer who is an outlier in their method. 

Yes, street and documentary photographers went back to the same location multiple times, or might find a great location and wait all day until something interesting happened. I don't think many of them just fired off three rolls of 36 exposure in the hopes of seeing something good when they processed them.

Err, I don't know how to break this to you but whether Winogrand, Parke or the local freelance Press guy they sold or sell their images to be published. They do not sit on an ethereal cloud pondering the upcoming M12 but go out to work, can you see the link now, it's right between your goalposts? 

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, lct said:

The smaller size of memory cards did allow for many more photos than with film anyway, since cameras where 6mp rather that 60mp then. The files were much smaller accordingly.

But still, 2 and 4GB did not leave much space. And what about this one? (it came with the Digilux2) . 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[lct]

Haha the Digilux 2 had not 6mp but 5mp if memory serves. And my Digilux 1, 4mp. My 6mp Epson R-D1 used SD cards up to 1gb. Ditto for my Nikon D70.