gilo

Lives in Philippines Philippines
Joined on Nov 15, 2004

Comments

Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (815 comments in total)
In reply to:

BBQue: 35mm is useless by todays standards of sharpness and resolution. Scanning and retouching takes WAY TO MUCH time and effort for very little to show for in return.

Medium format is a different story. I recommend everyone at least once in their life try out a medium format film camera.

dccberry, I fully agree with you if we are talking about efficiency. Film is not efficient, ever. But I don't work with it, I don't need to be competitive. I use it for pleasure.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2017 at 06:35 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (815 comments in total)
In reply to:

BBQue: 35mm is useless by todays standards of sharpness and resolution. Scanning and retouching takes WAY TO MUCH time and effort for very little to show for in return.

Medium format is a different story. I recommend everyone at least once in their life try out a medium format film camera.

'Apparently you have never used both. My Sony A7rii already runs circles around my Hasselblad medium format film system.

Of course, the Leica is a fine camera, and an artist can create works of art with any tools. But that's not what you meant, or did I misunderstand?'

As a matter of fact I have used both and I have owned a Leica M6 (and used it with a Summicron) for 10 years. The issue is that I don't like the look of digital, no matter how sharp it is and how much resolution it offers. It looks plastic to me, invariably. Of course I don't question the fact that it is much more efficient. As for Sony, I have used an A7 a couple of times and I just couldn't stand the menus. I gave it back in no time.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2017 at 06:31 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (815 comments in total)
In reply to:

BBQue: 35mm is useless by todays standards of sharpness and resolution. Scanning and retouching takes WAY TO MUCH time and effort for very little to show for in return.

Medium format is a different story. I recommend everyone at least once in their life try out a medium format film camera.

Sharpness and resolution are not all there is to photography. An old Leica M6 with a 1970 Summicron makes circles around any digital camera unless it is a 60k dollars medium format. Digital may show details but it still has a plasticky look which is awful. We just got used to it. Of course it is convenient and easier to handle if one is time pressed, but the feel is still plastic to me.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2017 at 19:23 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (815 comments in total)
In reply to:

Graham Austin: Fuji GA645, lovely camera and pretty affordable still. Got to be one of the smaller quality medium format cameras, but still tough as nails and really fun to shoot with.

I personally never liked it. I bought one because of the cult status it has but eventually I sold it. Focus was erratic and film rewind as well. I never enjoyed using it with its portrait framing horizontal and viceversa. Plus the dedicated flash was not TTL and finding the right exposure is very difficult. The pop up flash I found nearly useless. The lens is so slow it is almost impossible to shoot apart from full daylight. And the zoom is basically only a three step focal length. Overall too quirky for my tastes.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2017 at 19:13 UTC
In reply to:

Tom_A: In a way it reminds me of my lovely fuji ga645 rangefinder medium format film camera. Very basic controls and viewfinder information, forcing you to slow down (usually a good thing in photography), and the results are truly superb. But oh, the frustration of waiting until the film is developed & scanned or printed!
I still love to use this camera every few months (and my nikon fm2 and rolleiflex which are equally bare bones), they make you more careful when making picture.
So I can see the perverse minimal appeal of this new leica, but would find it too frustrating to use as my only camera.

I agree . It's just that the 645 has autofocus and not that great either (at least mine).

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 03:44 UTC

You must be a real idiot to buy a digital camera just to disassemble it.. If you really want to play the little engineer get an analogue one and you may learn something.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2016 at 04:42 UTC as 3rd comment
On article PIX 2015: Brian Ach and getting the right shot (31 comments in total)

The presentation is entertaining however few of the pictures he is showing there have a context in them. The context is simply given by his explanations on how he took the shot. Very few images are compelling, in my view; the most intriguing part remains understanding how he managed to get all these high profile jobs.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2015 at 05:41 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

gilo: I agree with brdeveloper that the best performer in daylight was Velvia and I disagree with Dean that the grain in film 'still looks downright ugly now that I’m used to silky-smooth digital'.Personally,I hate that silky-smooth digital look. Digital noise is ugly because it is computer generated and it's too regularly shaped.Film grain brings images alive because it is irregular.Pictures aren't supposed to be looked at in tiny cropped squares.Shooting film still gives you outstanding results and it is cheaper than digital as a film camera will last you forever and you will not need to upgrade.Apart from seeing your images immediately and clicking away, there is no real advantage to digital.Lastly, a well kept negative will survive all of us,but a hard drive which works for 20 years is still to be invented. So I will keep shooting film and use my smartphone when I want to snap away. Digital looks like plastic anyway and it is not worth spending a fortune every year to upgrade your DSLR.

To be quite honest, yes, I prefer the sound of vinyl, despite all its imperfections. But I don't care as much as far as differences in sound are concerned. I can put up also with the compressed sound of an ipod. But when it comes to images I can't help it: I always prefer the look of film. And, true, film types will be cut down in numbers, but are unlikely to disappear altogether for another 30 years. By then I will be 85, if I am still alive, so who cares. And by the way, everything fades in high humidity: hard drives and digital prints are no exception. So I don't see any improvement with digital compared to film in that respect either.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 13:55 UTC

I agree with brdeveloper that the best performer in daylight was Velvia and I disagree with Dean that the grain in film 'still looks downright ugly now that I’m used to silky-smooth digital'.Personally,I hate that silky-smooth digital look. Digital noise is ugly because it is computer generated and it's too regularly shaped.Film grain brings images alive because it is irregular.Pictures aren't supposed to be looked at in tiny cropped squares.Shooting film still gives you outstanding results and it is cheaper than digital as a film camera will last you forever and you will not need to upgrade.Apart from seeing your images immediately and clicking away, there is no real advantage to digital.Lastly, a well kept negative will survive all of us,but a hard drive which works for 20 years is still to be invented. So I will keep shooting film and use my smartphone when I want to snap away. Digital looks like plastic anyway and it is not worth spending a fortune every year to upgrade your DSLR.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2014 at 03:33 UTC as 17th comment | 3 replies
On article HDR for the Rest of Us (199 comments in total)

I find all these images pretty uninspiring. What's the nice thing about losing all the shadows and having everything displayed flatly in front of you? It's like when a child plays with the ipad and has fun taking distorted pictures. at the beginning it's fun but at the end he outgrows it. Similarly, I am just waiting for the time digital photography will be finally relegated to mobile phone snapping and real photography will go back to film.

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2012 at 10:45 UTC as 42nd comment | 2 replies
On article Software Technique: Creating and Adding Textures (81 comments in total)

Why would one feel the need to do that?

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2011 at 08:41 UTC as 26th comment | 1 reply
Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13