Irakly Shanidze

Irakly Shanidze

Lives in United States Grosse Pointe, United States
Works as a creative
Has a website at www.shanidze.com/en
Joined on May 21, 2004
About me:

I am a founder of International Academy of Photographic Arts that provides
online classes and live workshops in fine art photography ith an emphasis on creative approach and lateral thinking in the US, Canada, Western Europe and Russia.

Comments

Total: 104, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Irakly Shanidze: Ektachrome iconic? Hmmm... What am I missing? :)

As to this all film resurgence business, yes there is a trend, but I do not see it to be terribly long-lasting. At this point digital is better, easier, faster and, what is really important for professionals, cheaper. Anyone who used to burn through 100 rolls of 120 film per month knows what I am talking about.

Film will not die, yet I am not running to buy Kodak stock on the assumption that the company starts raking money by selling Ektachrome :)

The Davinator:

When it comes to the final image, film is not different. It is all up to a photographer to decide how the image should look like and what to do about it. It is a technical issue.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 04:07 UTC
In reply to:

Irakly Shanidze: Ektachrome iconic? Hmmm... What am I missing? :)

As to this all film resurgence business, yes there is a trend, but I do not see it to be terribly long-lasting. At this point digital is better, easier, faster and, what is really important for professionals, cheaper. Anyone who used to burn through 100 rolls of 120 film per month knows what I am talking about.

Film will not die, yet I am not running to buy Kodak stock on the assumption that the company starts raking money by selling Ektachrome :)

The best slide film to work with is certainly Fuji Provia 100F for 35mm and 400F for medium format. You can push it two stops maximum, otherwise contrast would be too high for natural lighting. So, if motion blur has not been an issue for you, welcome to the world of reversal film.

Now, the most interesting part. You did everything possible to get your precious slides correctly exposed and developed. How are you going to get it our there for us to see? Do you happen to own a drum scanner, or Imacon? Most likely, you will be scanning on something much less fancy, like a flatbed scanner with a transparency attachment. What 4.2Dmax of dynamic range will do for you? Good luck :)

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 04:05 UTC
In reply to:

Irakly Shanidze: Ektachrome iconic? Hmmm... What am I missing? :)

As to this all film resurgence business, yes there is a trend, but I do not see it to be terribly long-lasting. At this point digital is better, easier, faster and, what is really important for professionals, cheaper. Anyone who used to burn through 100 rolls of 120 film per month knows what I am talking about.

Film will not die, yet I am not running to buy Kodak stock on the assumption that the company starts raking money by selling Ektachrome :)

tom43: "Better" both in terms of image quality and in terms of user experience. I still believe that to learn photography and understand how pictures should look like, shooting slide film should be mandatory, but using it for professional work is simply insane.

I am telling this as someone who would spend a day shooting US Open Tennis and then go back to a hotel and develop slides in a JOBO processor in a bathroom to be able to submit them to AP before 8am next morning.

Indeed, a Cibachrome print is totally unmatched, but to make one it takes a perfectly exposed slide and a lot of time spent with VERY unpleasantly smelling chemicals. A perfectly exposed slide is much harder to attain than a carefully developed RAW image for a simple reason: photographic latitude of slides is 2 stops maximum (-1.5EV to +0.5EV), while modern sensors give you RAW files with latitude ranging from -2.5EV to +4EV, when shot at ISO1600.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 04:04 UTC
On article Hawks Factory announces new 35mm F2 in M-mount (70 comments in total)

Not an easy sell for $1800 considering the price of Leica Summarit 2.4/35 new, or even a Summicron 2/35 pre-asph used. Do not forget about Zeiss ZM 2/35, by the way...

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 23:03 UTC as 35th comment | 3 replies
On article Hawks Factory announces new 35mm F2 in M-mount (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

AndersSJ: "the company doesn’t specify whether the focusing mechanism is coupled to the camera’s rangefinder system or whether users will be expected to focus via Live View"

You won't find any live view in the M9 pictured above.

lol, at least they did not forget to make a cam for frame lines :)

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 22:57 UTC

Ektachrome iconic? Hmmm... What am I missing? :)

As to this all film resurgence business, yes there is a trend, but I do not see it to be terribly long-lasting. At this point digital is better, easier, faster and, what is really important for professionals, cheaper. Anyone who used to burn through 100 rolls of 120 film per month knows what I am talking about.

Film will not die, yet I am not running to buy Kodak stock on the assumption that the company starts raking money by selling Ektachrome :)

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 22:54 UTC as 30th comment | 19 replies
In reply to:

The Davinator: Hilarious all the film haters spouting off about how their digital gear is "better." They seem to miss the point of why we use film....the different look. The comments are as nonsensical as someone talking about higher resolution of better noise from watercolor vs oils.

About 10 years ago at the opening of my personal show I challenged visitors to figure out what pictures were film and what digital out of 24 prints on display (at the time I was shooting Contax N Digital and Kodak DCS ProBack 645C). There were about a hundred people at the opening. Not a single person could tell.
So, this is not about the look, but about knowing what to do to make your pictures have a certain look. So, as much as I admire your fascination with photography and film, please... :)

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 22:47 UTC

At 2016 Photokina Sandisk presented a 1TB SD card. Right after that Apple decides to remove an SD slot from Macbook Pro laptops. That does not sound like a coincidence to me.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 06:14 UTC as 7th comment

so, i guess, medium format and leica shooters are out :))))

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2017 at 06:35 UTC as 50th comment
In reply to:

Retzius: I respect a lens that is so large it removes the size advantage of the mirrorless body to which it is attached.

bravo

You are so right! Sony gave me a7R two years ago, and I could not get used to its convoluted controls. It had so many buttons on its back that it reminded me more of a cockpit of Airbus 330 than anything. Doing a flight pre-check before taking every picture has never been on my agenda :)

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2016 at 05:15 UTC
In reply to:

Retzius: I respect a lens that is so large it removes the size advantage of the mirrorless body to which it is attached.

bravo

The smaller size is not a problem of ergonomics. Sony a7 cameras clearly capitalize on a legacy of a very successful Minolta x700, which was the same size. The problem is that there is not enough room to house a battery large enough to last for more than 250 shots.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 17:44 UTC
In reply to:

Retzius: I respect a lens that is so large it removes the size advantage of the mirrorless body to which it is attached.

bravo

Well, for an additional $2500 you can have an SL body with the joystick and a boatload of focus points :)

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 17:41 UTC
In reply to:

Retzius: I respect a lens that is so large it removes the size advantage of the mirrorless body to which it is attached.

bravo

Mirrorless is not about EVF, it is about having no mirror and all problems that come with it.

Also, in case you did not know, it is the size that Sony marketing people were pushing, and that is why they made a7 series cameras so unnecessary small.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 07:40 UTC

Interestingly, the most valuable part of this update Leica did not even mention: one of a sudden, after the update, 24-90 became sharp on the long end. Like, I mean, REALLY sharp. Compared to that, removing limitations with M-lenses sounds ridiculously inconsequential :)

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 07:37 UTC as 5th comment

Only Sony? No Leica SL mount? At least Leica owners wouldn't see the price as something out of ordinary :)
On a serious note, images are not real performance proofs. Would be nice to see something more illustrative (like against the light at full aperture, Hyperfocal at f/11, waist portrait at f/8, to name a few) and at full resolution.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 23:36 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

zeratulmrye: Don't know about this one but the first generation is actually a rebranded mitakon 50 0.95

I can only imagine 1.4/135 pricing, but Carl Zeiss Sonnar 1.8/135 I own, and it did not break the bank.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 23:33 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: At the price I wonder how many preorders will they get? 16?

Even high-end video people are not interested (due to the mount choice) and due to the presence of an already just as good version for 1/4 the price.

This is just weird.

You can almost get a Canon 50mm f/1 AF for that price point on ebay (the dream lens). Or get an f/1.2. Just weird.

Great lens. The price is just incredibly stupid.

The only alternative to this lens is Leica Noctilux. Do you know how much that one costs?

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 23:28 UTC
On article Leica Noctilux: Overkill or Necessity (33 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carbon111: Sadly, the bokeh in the last two shots is really "nervous" and "edgy". :(

see above

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 01:12 UTC
On article Leica Noctilux: Overkill or Necessity (33 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wild Light: according to the metadata the photo with the dog and girl is shot with a 90mm Summicron, not a Noctilux!

I simply forgot to set the lens type in the menu. My Noctilux is not coded. In any case, anyone who shot with 2/90 will see the difference.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 01:11 UTC
On article Leica Noctilux: Overkill or Necessity (33 comments in total)
In reply to:

David Strachan: The girl with the dog...in my opinion the bokeh is really ghastly.

I just forgot to manually set the lens type. My Noctilux is not coded.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 01:09 UTC
Total: 104, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »