About the VERY long thread

[Pekka Saarinen]

Hi,

I was hinted in G1 forum that something made scrutinizing my gallery to one of the biggest thread in this forum.

I came here to see what's going on and my jaw dropped. I will not continue that thread, but would like to calmly comment on a couple of issues which came up in your replys:

ISSUE 1: Are these images result of a chosen camera model or the skill of the photographer?

I feel that there is a certain feature "level" in equipment that, when crossed, gives the photographer a freedom to do some art. G1, E-10, D30, 3030 and many more cameras are all at least at that level. So the answer to "would these photographs have been taken with some other camera" is most definitely yes. Of course, they might not look 100% same, but I suppose no-one would notice the differences easily without direct side-by-side comparison.

I have recently included to my gallery full camera setting information and explanation of the shooting situations to each big image, and on a separate page also full explanation of how the gallery was prepared.

And many of you compared gear vs. skill in musical terms. For your info, I have been a professional classical musician for 20 years now, and I can tell you that gear indeed does matter: good gear does not necessarily make you sound better (you adapt your technique to get the results needed) but good gear makes the work a lot easier and you can concentrate on doing art and not fighting with tools.

What I have liked in G1 that it "responds" well to MY way of doing things, and there are no blocks between me and the camera.

Technically speaking the photos could have been taken by anyone. But as a whole I consider they ARE my own artistic creations.

Of course, the images are result of being on the right place at the right time (my work forces me to travel from time to time). But they are also a result of applying several years of experience in visual design and knowledge of composition (and my strong personal taste of how things should be) to that single moment of releasing the shutter. No one can help you there. After all, taking a photograph is a situation where it's all there in front of you, but the choices how to do it are infinite and time is NOT on your side. Choose now. If you hesitate the moment passes by.

ISSUE 2: Quality by manipulation?

Some of you mentioned that the colors and other aspects have been manipulated and that is why the images look so good. This is not so. There are only two images which needed level changes, and none of the images needed any changes in saturation, noise, color balance etc. It's 95% out-of-the-camera stuff (RAW-> TIFF). Sharpening is used only to overcome slight loss of it after resizing. I hate images which look like they are sharpened, that's why I try to be very subtle with filters.

The full info of all this is at http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/faq.html . Feel free to comment if this indeed is manipulation or not.

All the best to all of you,

Pekka Saarinen
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/

 

[Dennis]

Hi,> > I was hinted in G1 forum that something made scrutinizing my> gallery to one of the biggest thread in this forum.> > I came here to see what's going on and my jaw dropped. I will not> continue that thread, but would like to calmly comment on a couple> of issues which came up in your replys:> > ISSUE 1: Are these images result of a chosen camera model or the> skill of the photographer?> > I feel that there is a certain feature "level" in equipment that,> when crossed, gives the photographer a freedom to do some art. G1,> E-10, D30, 3030 and many more cameras are all at least at that> level. So the answer to "would these photographs have been taken> with some other camera" is most definitely yes. Of course, they> might not look 100% same, but I suppose no-one would notice the> differences easily without direct side-by-side comparison.> > I have recently included to my gallery full camera setting> information and explanation of the shooting situations to each big> image, and on a separate page also full explanation of how the> gallery was prepared.> > And many of you compared gear vs. skill in musical terms. For your> info, I have been a professional classical musician for 20 years> now, and I can tell you that gear indeed does matter: good gear> does not necessarily make you sound better (you adapt your> technique to get the results needed) but good gear makes the work a> lot easier and you can concentrate on doing art and not fighting> with tools.> > What I have liked in G1 that it "responds" well to MY way of doing> things, and there are no blocks between me and the camera.> > Technically speaking the photos could have been taken by anyone.> But as a whole I consider they ARE my own artistic creations.> > Of course, the images are result of being on the right place at the> right time (my work forces me to travel from time to time). But> they are also a result of applying several years of experience in> visual design and knowledge of composition (and my strong personal> taste of how things should be) to that single moment of releasing> the shutter. No one can help you there. After all, taking a> photograph is a situation where it's all there in front of you, but> the choices how to do it are infinite and time is NOT on your side.> Choose now. If you hesitate the moment passes by.> > > ISSUE 2: Quality by manipulation?> > Some of you mentioned that the colors and other aspects have been> manipulated and that is why the images look so good. This is not> so. There are only two images which needed level changes, and> none of the images needed any changes in saturation, noise, color> balance etc. It's 95% out-of-the-camera stuff (RAW-> TIFF).> Sharpening is used only to overcome slight loss of it after> resizing. I hate images which look like they are sharpened, that's> why I try to be very subtle with filters.> > The full info of all this is at> http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/faq.html . Feel free to> comment if this indeed is manipulation or not.> > > All the best to all of you,> > Pekka Saarinen> http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/ > >

Hello Pekka,

It's very nice of you to drop in! Firstly, let me congragulate you on the quality of your images....they are indeed very good. As you may have surmised from just some of the messages, it got pretty emotional there for a while.

Your comments are right on the money. All cameras have limitations, and have design compromises in one way or another. You must decide if you can live with it and adapt, or you can try to find another camera that better suit your style of photography. Of course a better specified camera will make your life much easier, and leave you to concentrate on composition and photo taking rather than fiddling with knobs and buttons. Ultimately it's still the photographer though....far too many people I know use a particular camera brand or model as a "crutch".

 

[JohanP]

Hi,

anout your questions;

issue 1; The outcome depends on a good photographer in combination of beeing on the right place at the right time. The gear is just the tools. Knowledge of the tools is essential.

issue 2; Your photos are fine but the saturation, or the overall picture quality is not better than the result I get when working with my E10. With the E10, I think, I even have got greater possibilites to take good photos in very varying conditions.

Keep the good work up and post some more "refreshing" messages here to stimulate our mutual intresst.

Best regards
Johan

Hi,

I was hinted in G1 forum that something made scrutinizing my
gallery to one of the biggest thread in this forum.

I came here to see what's going on and my jaw dropped. I will not
continue that thread, but would like to calmly comment on a couple
of issues which came up in your replys:

ISSUE 1: Are these images result of a chosen camera model or the
skill of the photographer?

I feel that there is a certain feature "level" in equipment that,
when crossed, gives the photographer a freedom to do some art. G1,
E-10, D30, 3030 and many more cameras are all at least at that
level. So the answer to "would these photographs have been taken
with some other camera" is most definitely yes. Of course, they
might not look 100% same, but I suppose no-one would notice the
differences easily without direct side-by-side comparison.

I have recently included to my gallery full camera setting
information and explanation of the shooting situations to each big
image, and on a separate page also full explanation of how the
gallery was prepared.

And many of you compared gear vs. skill in musical terms. For your
info, I have been a professional classical musician for 20 years
now, and I can tell you that gear indeed does matter: good gear
does not necessarily make you sound better (you adapt your
technique to get the results needed) but good gear makes the work a
lot easier and you can concentrate on doing art and not fighting
with tools.

What I have liked in G1 that it "responds" well to MY way of doing
things, and there are no blocks between me and the camera.

Technically speaking the photos could have been taken by anyone.
But as a whole I consider they ARE my own artistic creations.

Of course, the images are result of being on the right place at the
right time (my work forces me to travel from time to time). But
they are also a result of applying several years of experience in
visual design and knowledge of composition (and my strong personal
taste of how things should be) to that single moment of releasing
the shutter. No one can help you there. After all, taking a
photograph is a situation where it's all there in front of you, but
the choices how to do it are infinite and time is NOT on your side.
Choose now. If you hesitate the moment passes by.

ISSUE 2: Quality by manipulation?

Some of you mentioned that the colors and other aspects have been
manipulated and that is why the images look so good. This is not
so. There are only two images which needed level changes, and
none of the images needed any changes in saturation, noise, color
balance etc. It's 95% out-of-the-camera stuff (RAW-> TIFF).
Sharpening is used only to overcome slight loss of it after
resizing. I hate images which look like they are sharpened, that's
why I try to be very subtle with filters.

The full info of all this is at
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/faq.html . Feel free to
comment if this indeed is manipulation or not.

All the best to all of you,

Pekka Saarinen
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/

 

[Jono Slack29833]

Hi Pekka

It seems to me that the one thing that came out loud and clear from what was otherwise rather a silly thread (I was a culprit too!); was the everyone thought your photographs were great. I certainly did.

Your post is fine and sensible too.

good luck to you, and best regards
jono slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Hi,

I was hinted in G1 forum that something made scrutinizing my
gallery to one of the biggest thread in this forum.

I came here to see what's going on and my jaw dropped. I will not
continue that thread, but would like to calmly comment on a couple
of issues which came up in your replys:

ISSUE 1: Are these images result of a chosen camera model or the
skill of the photographer?

I feel that there is a certain feature "level" in equipment that,
when crossed, gives the photographer a freedom to do some art. G1,
E-10, D30, 3030 and many more cameras are all at least at that
level. So the answer to "would these photographs have been taken
with some other camera" is most definitely yes. Of course, they
might not look 100% same, but I suppose no-one would notice the
differences easily without direct side-by-side comparison.

I have recently included to my gallery full camera setting
information and explanation of the shooting situations to each big
image, and on a separate page also full explanation of how the
gallery was prepared.

And many of you compared gear vs. skill in musical terms. For your
info, I have been a professional classical musician for 20 years
now, and I can tell you that gear indeed does matter: good gear
does not necessarily make you sound better (you adapt your
technique to get the results needed) but good gear makes the work a
lot easier and you can concentrate on doing art and not fighting
with tools.

What I have liked in G1 that it "responds" well to MY way of doing
things, and there are no blocks between me and the camera.

Technically speaking the photos could have been taken by anyone.
But as a whole I consider they ARE my own artistic creations.

Of course, the images are result of being on the right place at the
right time (my work forces me to travel from time to time). But
they are also a result of applying several years of experience in
visual design and knowledge of composition (and my strong personal
taste of how things should be) to that single moment of releasing
the shutter. No one can help you there. After all, taking a
photograph is a situation where it's all there in front of you, but
the choices how to do it are infinite and time is NOT on your side.
Choose now. If you hesitate the moment passes by.

ISSUE 2: Quality by manipulation?

Some of you mentioned that the colors and other aspects have been
manipulated and that is why the images look so good. This is not
so. There are only two images which needed level changes, and
none of the images needed any changes in saturation, noise, color
balance etc. It's 95% out-of-the-camera stuff (RAW-> TIFF).
Sharpening is used only to overcome slight loss of it after
resizing. I hate images which look like they are sharpened, that's
why I try to be very subtle with filters.

The full info of all this is at
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/faq.html . Feel free to
comment if this indeed is manipulation or not.

All the best to all of you,

Pekka Saarinen
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/

 

[TomJ]

Hi,

I was hinted in G1 forum that something made scrutinizing my
gallery to one of the biggest thread in this forum.

I came here to see what's going on and my jaw dropped. I will not
continue that thread, but would like to calmly comment on a couple
of issues which came up in your replys:

ISSUE 1: Are these images result of a chosen camera model or the
skill of the photographer?

I feel that there is a certain feature "level" in equipment that,
when crossed, gives the photographer a freedom to do some art. G1,
E-10, D30, 3030 and many more cameras are all at least at that
level. So the answer to "would these photographs have been taken
with some other camera" is most definitely yes. Of course, they
might not look 100% same, but I suppose no-one would notice the
differences easily without direct side-by-side comparison.

I have recently included to my gallery full camera setting
information and explanation of the shooting situations to each big
image, and on a separate page also full explanation of how the
gallery was prepared.

And many of you compared gear vs. skill in musical terms. For your
info, I have been a professional classical musician for 20 years
now, and I can tell you that gear indeed does matter: good gear
does not necessarily make you sound better (you adapt your
technique to get the results needed) but good gear makes the work a
lot easier and you can concentrate on doing art and not fighting
with tools.

What I have liked in G1 that it "responds" well to MY way of doing
things, and there are no blocks between me and the camera.

Technically speaking the photos could have been taken by anyone.
But as a whole I consider they ARE my own artistic creations.

Of course, the images are result of being on the right place at the
right time (my work forces me to travel from time to time). But
they are also a result of applying several years of experience in
visual design and knowledge of composition (and my strong personal
taste of how things should be) to that single moment of releasing
the shutter. No one can help you there. After all, taking a
photograph is a situation where it's all there in front of you, but
the choices how to do it are infinite and time is NOT on your side.
Choose now. If you hesitate the moment passes by.

ISSUE 2: Quality by manipulation?

Some of you mentioned that the colors and other aspects have been
manipulated and that is why the images look so good. This is not
so. There are only two images which needed level changes, and
none of the images needed any changes in saturation, noise, color
balance etc. It's 95% out-of-the-camera stuff (RAW-> TIFF).
Sharpening is used only to overcome slight loss of it after
resizing. I hate images which look like they are sharpened, that's
why I try to be very subtle with filters.

The full info of all this is at
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/faq.html . Feel free to
comment if this indeed is manipulation or not.

All the best to all of you,

Pekka Saarinen
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/

Hi, Pekka!

Thanks for the comments about your images and, yes, that is one LONG thread. I think you are right on the mark about an artist and his tools. Good equipment helps, but utimately creative expression is a very personal thing and most technically competant images could be made with any one of many current cameras. It's nice to see technical competance combined with creative spark and result in work that many can admire and enjoy and aspire towards.

Keep up the good work,

TomJ

 

[Gordon Leckenby]

Hi Pekka,

Thank you for your conciderate comments about "Art". I fear that many buy a fine instrument thinking that it'll make up for their lack of skill. When it is only study and practice that will help them to turn that difficult corner. The work that you have accomplished could have been done with any quality instrument "that did not stand in your way". Certainly, you are an artist, the recording device is not, it is only your tool. A card-board Brownie in your hands would produce creditable works.

Hi,

I was hinted in G1 forum that something made scrutinizing my
gallery to one of the biggest thread in this forum.

I came here to see what's going on and my jaw dropped. I will not
continue that thread, but would like to calmly comment on a couple
of issues which came up in your replys:

ISSUE 1: Are these images result of a chosen camera model or the
skill of the photographer?

I feel that there is a certain feature "level" in equipment that,
when crossed, gives the photographer a freedom to do some art. G1,
E-10, D30, 3030 and many more cameras are all at least at that
level. So the answer to "would these photographs have been taken
with some other camera" is most definitely yes. Of course, they
might not look 100% same, but I suppose no-one would notice the
differences easily without direct side-by-side comparison.

I have recently included to my gallery full camera setting
information and explanation of the shooting situations to each big
image, and on a separate page also full explanation of how the
gallery was prepared.

And many of you compared gear vs. skill in musical terms. For your
info, I have been a professional classical musician for 20 years
now, and I can tell you that gear indeed does matter: good gear
does not necessarily make you sound better (you adapt your
technique to get the results needed) but good gear makes the work a
lot easier and you can concentrate on doing art and not fighting
with tools.

What I have liked in G1 that it "responds" well to MY way of doing
things, and there are no blocks between me and the camera.

Technically speaking the photos could have been taken by anyone.
But as a whole I consider they ARE my own artistic creations.

Of course, the images are result of being on the right place at the
right time (my work forces me to travel from time to time). But
they are also a result of applying several years of experience in
visual design and knowledge of composition (and my strong personal
taste of how things should be) to that single moment of releasing
the shutter. No one can help you there. After all, taking a
photograph is a situation where it's all there in front of you, but
the choices how to do it are infinite and time is NOT on your side.
Choose now. If you hesitate the moment passes by.

ISSUE 2: Quality by manipulation?

Some of you mentioned that the colors and other aspects have been
manipulated and that is why the images look so good. This is not
so. There are only two images which needed level changes, and
none of the images needed any changes in saturation, noise, color
balance etc. It's 95% out-of-the-camera stuff (RAW-> TIFF).
Sharpening is used only to overcome slight loss of it after
resizing. I hate images which look like they are sharpened, that's
why I try to be very subtle with filters.

The full info of all this is at
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/faq.html . Feel free to
comment if this indeed is manipulation or not.

All the best to all of you,

Pekka Saarinen
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/

 

[Jono Slack29833]

Hi Pekka

I hope that your feet are firmly planted in the ground, otherwise what you are about to read may swell your head

Regards
jono slack

Hi,

I was hinted in G1 forum that something made scrutinizing my
gallery to one of the biggest thread in this forum.

I came here to see what's going on and my jaw dropped. I will not
continue that thread, but would like to calmly comment on a couple
of issues which came up in your replys:

ISSUE 1: Are these images result of a chosen camera model or the
skill of the photographer?

I feel that there is a certain feature "level" in equipment that,
when crossed, gives the photographer a freedom to do some art. G1,
E-10, D30, 3030 and many more cameras are all at least at that
level. So the answer to "would these photographs have been taken
with some other camera" is most definitely yes. Of course, they
might not look 100% same, but I suppose no-one would notice the
differences easily without direct side-by-side comparison.

I have recently included to my gallery full camera setting
information and explanation of the shooting situations to each big
image, and on a separate page also full explanation of how the
gallery was prepared.

And many of you compared gear vs. skill in musical terms. For your
info, I have been a professional classical musician for 20 years
now, and I can tell you that gear indeed does matter: good gear
does not necessarily make you sound better (you adapt your
technique to get the results needed) but good gear makes the work a
lot easier and you can concentrate on doing art and not fighting
with tools.

What I have liked in G1 that it "responds" well to MY way of doing
things, and there are no blocks between me and the camera.

Technically speaking the photos could have been taken by anyone.
But as a whole I consider they ARE my own artistic creations.

Of course, the images are result of being on the right place at the
right time (my work forces me to travel from time to time). But
they are also a result of applying several years of experience in
visual design and knowledge of composition (and my strong personal
taste of how things should be) to that single moment of releasing
the shutter. No one can help you there. After all, taking a
photograph is a situation where it's all there in front of you, but
the choices how to do it are infinite and time is NOT on your side.
Choose now. If you hesitate the moment passes by.

ISSUE 2: Quality by manipulation?

Some of you mentioned that the colors and other aspects have been
manipulated and that is why the images look so good. This is not
so. There are only two images which needed level changes, and
none of the images needed any changes in saturation, noise, color
balance etc. It's 95% out-of-the-camera stuff (RAW-> TIFF).
Sharpening is used only to overcome slight loss of it after
resizing. I hate images which look like they are sharpened, that's
why I try to be very subtle with filters.

The full info of all this is at
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/faq.html . Feel free to
comment if this indeed is manipulation or not.

All the best to all of you,

Pekka Saarinen
http://studio-on-the.net/photography/G1/