leewardism

Joined on Mar 29, 2013

Comments

Total: 38, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Cine Ray: I think I can get same stf bokeh with a radial gnd filter and 100mm macro. ( if there is one out there) you never get a full f 2.8 with this 100mm gm.

Blurring the daylights out of a pic and running a grad mask is nothing like it trust me.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 05:53 UTC
In reply to:

Cine Ray: I think I can get same stf bokeh with a radial gnd filter and 100mm macro. ( if there is one out there) you never get a full f 2.8 with this 100mm gm.

Guys, you really have to use the lens to get an incredible result. Using PS is nothing like the real deal I am afraid.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2017 at 05:51 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1556 comments in total)
In reply to:

lhkjacky: @Sdaniella,
Here is the image that show A99mk2 Full-articulated LCD can face forward, at the same time it does not block the mic jack, headphone jack, HDMI & USB port.
https://s26.postimg.org/ry6dwhqmx/A99_II_w_SAL2470_Z2_tilt_lcd_4a.jpg

When every single nasal hair has to be razor sharp, accept no substitute.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 11:24 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1556 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vivid1: Another whiz bang camera from Sony that looks like it should appeal to pros, yet it has no pro following because it has no pro system. Why does Sony not decide which system they want to support, spend money on expanding their lens lineup, then convince some pros - maybe they'll get some customers...

This infatuation with "Pro Spec" is very overrated. Some of the Minolta lenses are better bang for buck than most of the new stuff out there. And believe it or not I feel this camera is aimed at expressly those who want a hand full of their legacy or G lenses and an upgrade occasionally. Sony still keeps them brand loyal.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 11:22 UTC
In reply to:

leewardism: We all jumped at the chance to go digital, because Dev & Print was not cheap, neither was the camera tech. We could shoot 24 or 36 shots and I we were lucky we were really happy with probably 10 % of them.
Now we shoot volumes of stuff, we have to go through, and we still get about 10-15% we are happy with and then we skip into Lightroom and Pshop and wind up doing far to much work for the ROI. What happened to real fun?.

There is an Aussie by the name of Jerry Ghonis who has international awards for wedding portraits with an Iphone. The guy is just over the top. Check it out.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2017 at 06:42 UTC
In reply to:

melgross: I can't understand any of this. I ran a major commercial photo lab here in NYC for many years, until we sold it in late 2004. By that time, we were mostly digital.

When talking to Kodak, I saw the depths that film had come to. In fact, in 2000, I wrote an article for their monthly publication, "Lab Notes" that went to all the independent labs that used Kodak products. In that, I predicted that by 2010, film would effectly be dead, and it was. Kodak predicted the same thing later, in 2002.

We also processed Kodachrome film with our own modified process, which we developed for professional photographers, as Kodachrome was considered, and treated as, a consumer film. We and Kodak signed more than a few agreements over that.

Having said that, Kodachrome was a great film, for its day. But as far as sharpness goes, it's the equivelant of between a 14 and 18MB sensor, and the color is so much worse from batch to batch.

The fact of the matter is Provia is the preferred scan medium. So much more forgiving and the profile is far less invasive.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2017 at 11:15 UTC
In reply to:

Scott Eaton: While K25 in 35mm and the short lived 120 variants provided good enlargement and projection potential nobody does optical / reversal printing anymore which will require you to scan it. Spent enough years trying to get decent commercial scans from Kodachrome, and while it can be done it requires a precisely exposed slide that's underexposed proportionally with increasing contrast. I'll take 120 Provia - thanks.
So, once again what are you going to do with a box of Kodachrome other than try to take pictures of it with a digital camera (scanner)? Nothing. Just another distraction for hipster contrarians who prefer to walk around with ancient cameras and bad mouth digital while stroking their precious Lecias, but don't actually take pictures. IMO, if Kodak wants to bring back a legacy emulsion you can actually do something with I suggest RG25. At least existing minilabs can print it.

Today's drum scanners scan full range, uncorrected and a scan profile is applied, nothing like the fly by the seat of your pants days. An ICC profile for Kodachrome is easy to formulate and it is applied at RGB stage. Nothing like the eighties.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2017 at 11:12 UTC
In reply to:

sh10453: I can only pull my hair off, or bang my head against the wall.
Kodak is hanging onto life by a thin, spiderweb-type thread. These "smart" people are insisting on cutting off that thread and ending Kodak's life forever!

There is no logic or any business sense in what they are trying to do (either here or with their super 8 video camera).
It's equivalent to something like Ford deciding to dedicate a factory to, and start making the Model T all over again.
It baffles me why they don't spend this money on an enthusiast-level digital camera that is worthy of the good old Kodak name!
No doubt Mr. Eastman is now rolling in his grave.
It's true that there is no limit when it comes to idiocy.

The fuji instax is a instant camera that is selling extremely well, why?. Crappy images, silly colour, no jpeg, but that's not the point!. People are actually having FUN, laughing at silliness and how cool those stupid images are.
There isn't anything "madcap" about digital, as a matter of fact it's almost life and death. ( OMG is that potential grain???) yes, and it's OK.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2017 at 11:06 UTC
In reply to:

Sivakumar V: Just funny. After all the film cameras are extinct, who is going to shoot film. It is like making a pen when people use only key board.

No one can afford the cost of film and dev and scans at scale. We shoot far too much and fix downstream, where applying your knowledge and shooting it properly is far more satisfying.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2017 at 10:57 UTC
In reply to:

Yuree: I used ektachrome, fuji velvia and provia, and I would be very happy to try kodachrome. First time i used professional film at 2011 and I cant stop to use it by now. Also since 2011 i use full frame DSLR and since 2014 my cell phones, but analogue films is additional inspiration to me.
Digital cameras are very easy to use, but also very boring. Any way, realistic grayish digital colors are not interesting for me. Often need to spend much time to achieve harmonious and vivid colors. You cant edit whole image at once, you need to edit HSL for individual image areas.
There is something magical in whole analogue process, starting from manual exposure setting, ending with getting scans.

The obvious draw back of positive film is hard shadows. So working with flash to soften the contrast will give you everything you want. If too open you can always use Photoshop on those scans.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2017 at 10:53 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: If they can run this profitably, why not? I'd buy me some Kodachrome (and processing services for it, of course). Would I buy a ton of it? Probably not. Would there be a lot of enthusiasts like me? Probably yes.

Some of the best images I have ever seen was from two and a quarter Color Neg film scanned on a drum scanner in RGB, the best of both worlds.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2017 at 10:49 UTC
In reply to:

rsf3127: Check this out: http://www.adox.de/Media/cms20test.jpg

Guys it's not about building new cameras, that's not the point, the tech already exists and is cheap as chips and you can have any camera you have ever lusted over from Ebay. It will make you a far better "in camera" photographer because you really have to work for it.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2017 at 10:45 UTC
In reply to:

FF Pro: I would be happy if someone were to bring back a nice film 35mm camera. I know there are film cameras still made but $2500 for the Nikon F6 or $4000 for the Leica M7 seem really steep, even if the build quality is all that. I am talking about a Contax G2, Canon AE-1 Program like camera. I would take whatever I could get.

I would go all in for a brand new 503CW regardless of price.

If you want something brilliant, buy a Minolta Dynax 7 or the pro 9 for a song, the G series lens ane exceptional.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2017 at 10:25 UTC

We all jumped at the chance to go digital, because Dev & Print was not cheap, neither was the camera tech. We could shoot 24 or 36 shots and I we were lucky we were really happy with probably 10 % of them.
Now we shoot volumes of stuff, we have to go through, and we still get about 10-15% we are happy with and then we skip into Lightroom and Pshop and wind up doing far to much work for the ROI. What happened to real fun?.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 11:26 UTC as 1st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

turvyT: Great choice. It relieves some pressure from all the seriousness about gear and pixel-peepingness that surround us. And the goofy shot you like, Allison, is cool, by the way.

Absurdity is what we crave, because we laugh at ourselves and those around us. Is that what photography should be most of the time. That gleeful moment of silliness or laughter that punctuates our very existence.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 11:17 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: Fuji's annual report claims:

"Instax instant camera annual worldwide sales volume exceed 5 million units".

Wow...

Does anyone get the impression, that digital photography is so complicated, with all the digital programs, Pshop, Lightroom etc etc and all the paraphernalia that now goes hand in hand with digital, that the fun has been replaced by "all to hard"

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 11:14 UTC
In reply to:

Miki Nemeth: I love the concept of mobile printers like the Instax or Polaroid ZIP. I love the concept of analog photos ( I have Canon FD and EOS 135 film cameras as well as a Mamiya RZ67 120 film) that can be scanned. I love FP100 instant peel apart photos (on my Mamiya), where the negative can be scanned after bleaching off the black back paint. But, an instant camera that cannot be scanned, with no digital version possible, hmm, I am not sure it would be my cake.

Talk about full circle, get this, you can take a digital pic of the print and send it to yourself, not quite the best of both worlds.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 11:09 UTC
In reply to:

DamianFI: I don't get it, the images look like a Nikon D40 with crushed contrast and an instagram filter.
There's no character in it, unless that character is pathetic IQ.

There's glorious film like Velvia, Kodachrome and more and then there's this rubbish.

OOps very little grain! and yes it looks like, dare I say it Film.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 11:05 UTC

I can see people back dabbeling in Kodachrone and Fuji slide film again, and the next question is, is there drum scanners still around?????

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 11:03 UTC as 2nd comment
On article SLT strikes back: Sony a99 II real-world sample gallery (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

quietrich: As many have pointed out below, the images are noisy; but it's luminance noise that renders pretty close to grain. To my eye they have a pleasant 'grittiness' that adds character to the photographs. Completely different to the usual rather bland Sony output, but still with plenty of DR.
I would think that it's a camera particularly suited for landscape (especially urban), sport, documentary and street photography; probably less useful for portraiture or commercial studio work. I'm not trading cameras at the moment, but if I were then I'd seriously look at this.
PS @ Samuel Spencer, image 25 is very beautiful.

Well we have seen these pics in mundane conditions, someone offer me a few studio shots at 100 ISO with some real lights and then"Pixel peep".

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 10:46 UTC
Total: 38, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »