Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/05/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I'm with Ted on his post here to me the main point being and that he is making is that photography is not a medium of language. Its end result is not words on paper nor words spoken. Its end result is an image. Often on paper. And that image is going to speak for itself. What ever hoops we did or did not go thought to make that image is really not the point as if its a successful image than that's all anybody needs to know. You're looking at it....it either works for you or it doesn't. - - from my iRabs. Mark Rabiner http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ > From: Ted Grant <tedgrant at shaw.ca> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 11:54:13 -0700 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Shocking: MM images do not look like film! > > Richard Man OFFERED: >>>> Me? I prefer to tweak the images to have the tones that I like. That's >>>> the > important thing to me. I don't know whether it's more like Tri-X, or Acros, > or probably none - I just push and pull sliders until they look good to me. > > I don't mind film grain, but it would be a cold day in Heck that I add any > grain/noise to a digital image. Seems too much bother.<<<< > > Hi Richard, > I'm with you on this one as my complete career has always been the finished > print product! MOST IMPORTANTLY..................... THE CONTENT first and > foremost as the best made print one can make! > > I've read these technical posts and in nearly every case "I DO NOT HAVE A > CLUE WHAT MOST OF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!" > > When I shot film I was never that much into the"look!" But did I capture > the > moment right on the mark? If I shot 3200 film and pushed it to 6400 one > stop > I expected a "bit of extra grain, so be it." Who cared as long as, "did I > get the Moment?" And will I get paid? Always did! :-) That was the nice > part! :-) > > Now we move up to digital and what I see here in all the stuff you folks > write about is quite amazing and scares the heck out of me! WHY? Well my > 13X19 prints must look crappy given all the technical things you folks > point > out about changes that can be made. However I stick to my KISS fashion of > 61 > years experience and on the computer screen everything is looked at as it > came out of the camera... Then it's auto everything and if it looks "COOL?" > I leave it alone. If it doesn't I return to "what was plain old fashion > normal to my eye." > > Do auto colour-levels-contrast and go to print! It comes out and looks > pretty damn good and I get paid $1000 for the print! Very lucky me that the > buyer didn't ask me to explain the intricacies of making the print. When > all > I did was capture the moment at the peak, hit everything on automatic! And > there you go eh! Nice photo on heavy duty fine art paper! > > And yes I certainly understand when it comes to printing and what can be > and > can't be done is how each of us do our thing. Me? I keep it simple because > that's been my life in most cases. I sometimes wonder if one can be overly > technically trained? Certainly when we see some of the over the top digital > MANIPULATIONS. > > ERGO: You make so many changes electronically the image that motivated you > to go "CLICK!" Is no longer what you see on the printed page? Nor as good > as > the original scene whatever that may have been? > > Just a passing thought. Heck one could almost go back to film, soup it, dry > and cut and wet tray print and dried while some of you folks sound like > you'd still be screwing around on the screen. :-) joking, joking! ;-) > > cheers, > Dr. ted > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " <richard at richardmanphoto.com> > To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> > Sent: Friday, May 18, 2012 11:43 PM > Subject: Re: [Leica] Shocking: MM images do not look like film! > > >> Hehe, I think that ship sailed long ago. I don't use "film emulation" >> filter, but if someone wants to? More power to them. >> >> Me? I prefer to tweak the images to have the tones that I like. That's the >> important thing to me. I don't know whether it's more like Tri-X, or >> Acros, >> or probably none - I just push and pull sliders until they look good to >> me. >> >> I don't mind film grain, but it would be a cold day in Heck that I add any >> grain/noise to a digital image. Seems too much bother. >> >> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Mark Rabiner >> <mark at rabinergroup.com>wrote: >> >>> My point is not to say people are saying film is better. >>> But that its being said there is a discernable difference even at >>> smallish >>> file sizes Between film and digital imagery. >>> And I feel strongly there is no tonality advantages to film unless the >>> sun >>> is in the picture behind some clouds. Maybe. >>> They only way you know film from digital is where the noise lands. >>> Highlights for film, shadows for digital. >>> And you see those kinds of things only in real big pix. Not the stuff we >>> see >>> on the internet. Which tends in most cases to be the only stuff anybody >>> ever >>> sees. >>> >>> I'm against film emulation software which puts grain in the highlights >>> and >>> gives a red over sensitive "tri x look". >>> Its baloney. And The inference is there is some advantage to the "film >>> Look". >>> Well there is no "film look". Not in the file sizes we see on the >>> internet. >>> >>> If I and a lot of photographers I know thought that there was some >>> worthwhile film look we'd be shooting film to get that look. Not digital >>> and >>> hyper compensation for it. >>> >>> I Can't Believe It's Yogurt! >>> I Can't Believe It's Not Butter! >>> >>> I'm against doing one thing and pretending its another thing. >>> There's a real back stabbing passive aggressive element to it. >>> >>> >>> - - from my iRabs. >>> Mark Rabiner >>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ >>> >>> >>>> From: John McMaster <john at chiaroscuro.co.nz> >>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >>>> Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 17:46:24 +1200 >>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Shocking: MM images do not look like film! >>>> >>>> >>> http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/leica-m-x-r/37364-leica-m-monochromatic-proces >>>> sing-insights.html which links to >>>> >>>> >>> http://fotografz.smugmug.com/Photography/Jonos-MM-files/23016060_2TzGLp#!i=1 >>>> 851170263&k=swB4gbS >>>> >>>> john >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> >>>> Mark, no one says film is better. If you look at the referred to >>>> images, >>>> they were quite flat. The author eventually admits that he could have >>> done >>>> more and indeed he passed the files to other people who did more and >>>> the >>>> images were 100% better. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information