If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#141
|
|||
|
|||
ideal cameras? Omega 120 surprise convertible lens RF?
On Wed, 26 May 2004 20:45:41 +0200, "Q.G. de Bakker"
wrote: Neil Gould wrote: OTOH, I see no problem scanning MF or LF. Right now, that's pretty much the best of all worlds. Exactly what I wrote in another post a while back. We're on the same page, here. While i too am a "scanner", i'm not on that "i see no problem" page with you. While i thought developing film was terminally boring, scanning film really "outbores" that by far. And i still have to develop those films too...! Ahhh, one must work for all that "quality," even in the digital darkroom. It generally takes me an evening -- say four or five hours' work -- to scan a roll of 645 (15 frames.) The good news is you only have to do that once. rafe b. http://www.terrapinphoto.com |
#142
|
|||
|
|||
MF future? ideal cameras?
On Wed, 26 May 2004 16:39:03 GMT, "RSD99"
wrote: "Raphael Bustin" posted: "... there's no need for 16 million pixels to make a 4x6" print when our printers really only have an effective contone resolution of, say, 250 dpi. ..." WHY should the user be limited to a 4" x 6" print? I may want to make 40" x 60" displays ... or maybe even larger. Read my comments in the context of the preceding thread. 4x6" just happens to be the lowest common denominator (if not 3x5") for the prints that consumers generally expect. If you're making 40" x 60" displays you're in a different league and my comments don't apply to you. (Nor me, I can never get enough pixels.) rafe b. http://www.terrapinphoto.com |
#143
|
|||
|
|||
ideal cameras? Omega 120 surprise convertible lens RF?
On Wed, 26 May 2004 19:45:46 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote: Ah, this is a different matter. I think that the introduction of digital photography has stirred the pot, but when things settle down, I think there will still be an appropriate use for MF that can't be satisfied by other options. I see, a silver lining to the dreaded digital invasion. And why should it not be so? Digital will introduce (or reintroduce) people to photography. Eventually, some will take it seriously, and begin to look beyond digital. (Either that, or agitate for better and better digital.) I dare say it's happened to me. I jumped to MF four years ago. To digital two years ago. And to LF just these last few months. There's a place for all of the old gear and new, except maybe the Nikons, I fear. rafe b. http://www.terrapinphoto.com |
#144
|
|||
|
|||
MF future? ideal cameras?
In article , Lassi
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Hippel=E4inen?= wrote: jjs wrote: The thread that mentioned the 44mm square digital sensor reminds me of one solution to the MF digital "problem". Let's think like marketeers and simply declare that MF is smaller! That's the ticket. If you can't meet the medium's high standards, redefine and lower the bar! Start spreading a rumour: now that a suitably sized sensor will become available, Rollei will introduce a digital back for Baby Rolleiflex :-) Look at the friggin ridiculous overpriced digital wannabe LF and MF hardware that Calumet and Sinar have. Seems to me they are so far ahead of the silliness curve that there's no catching up. Parody in action. |
#145
|
|||
|
|||
ideal cameras? Omega 120 surprise convertible lens RF?
In article , Raphael Bustin
wrote: I see, a silver lining to the dreaded digital invasion. And why should it not be so? Digital will introduce (or reintroduce) people to photography. Eventually, some will take it seriously, and begin to look beyond digital. TV didn't move the population towards live theater - unless it was on TV and you know that's not the same thing. The Instamatic didn't move the population to appreciate photography, either. Digital won't do squat to change anything for the better. It's just more of the same - built-in obsolescence, lost pictures and in that regard I applaud digital. |
#146
|
|||
|
|||
MF future? ideal cameras?
|
#147
|
|||
|
|||
MF future? ideal cameras?
In article , Any Moose
Poster wrote: In article , (jjs) wrote: Look at the friggin ridiculous overpriced digital wannabe LF and MF hardware that Calumet and Sinar have. Seems to me they are so far ahead of the silliness curve that there's no catching up. Parody in action. 3k for a digital "view camera" without the camera oh come on don't cha want one? ;-) I'd rather have a friggin root canal. |
#149
|
|||
|
|||
digital bubble to burst? ideal cameras?
Vladamir30 wrote:
Very likely true, maybe in boxes from China. I see nothing wrong with scanning, or digital printing, except for B/W. Possibly you've never seen a digital black and white print made by someone who really knows what they're doing, e.g. George DeWolfe. Yes, I have. While it is definitely my opinion, I still feel that these prints are not the same as true B/W prints. Bottom line on this is that I do not like the quality of the prints, and I will not mistake them for true B/W prints. That is not to say that they cannot be very well done high quality images. On the contrary, I find many of these digitally printed B/W images to be very aesthetically pleasing, and very nice compelling compositions. The method of printing does not invalidate the fact that I like the images. Since taking George's digital black and white printing course at the Palm Beach Photographic Workshops a couple years ago I've been scanning my 4x5 and 8x10 negatives and printing B&W digitally. I do the same with my 6x7 negatives if the print won't be larger than 8x10, hardware limitations of my relatively inexpensive scanner prevent me from making quality prints larger than that from 6x7 so I still use my traditional darkroom for that very limited purpose. I think the greatly enhanced control, the ability to make tiny changes impossible in a traditional darkroom, the ability to easily experiment and see different possibilities instantaneously on the monitor all add up to a preferable way, for me at least, of making black and white prints. I participate in a group of large format photographers that has been meeting once a month for 8 or so years now. Three years ago only one person in the group printed black and white digitally, today only one person doesn't. I took the Dan Burkholder digital negative and platinum printing workshop in 1997. I don't see anything wrong with those techniques, of others using similar techniques. I also do pre-press preparation as part of my work (I am not just a photographer). I have seen incredibly well done offset and gravure prints done from scanned B/W images, many that I have prepared for publication. I even have several samples done using four to eight Pantone inks (all blacks), and those are amazingly good. Despite all those quality examples, I still like true chemical B/W prints. I do like the Burkholder method of creating digital contact negatives, and I have used that for some of my images. I guess I just like true B/W prints so much that they are always my first choice. Inkjet or Gicleé B/W is far down my list of choices. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com |
#150
|
|||
|
|||
ideal cameras? Omega 120 surprise convertible lens RF?
"Q.G. de Bakker" wrote:
Gordon Moat wrote: [...] It could be that the only Hasselblad camera production occurs at Fuji, with the H1 and Xpan becoming the only product lines. This would then be badge engineering trading solely on the Hasselblad brand name. At that point, it becomes a luxury product, and is likely to never return to a larger market, unless they start making digital P&S cameras (like Rollei). Just a note: Hasselblad is still producing most of the H1 too. They are still very much a manufacturing company, not just an office in which brand name resides. Glad to hear that. I am not dissing the quality of Fuji products, and in fact I have considered purchasing an XPan. I think the partnership is a good thing for the quality of the products They tried clocks, haven't they? ;-) Yeah, surprised they haven't done sunglasses yet, though Zeiss has the optics name over Hasselblad recognition. The fitted leather bags for their cameras are already hinting at the shift to luxury only products. Hasselblad is not new to the "brand merchandising" game. You may want to have a look at what goodies the Hasselblad Boutique is offering. The boutique, now on the internet (http://www.agoreklam.net/?Hasselblad_Boutique), has been selling things like this for years. ;-) Wow, guess I missed that site. Some cool looking items in there (Sorry . . . occupational hazard to like design when your work involves design)! Business Card Case . . . in "retro" style no less . . . girlfriend might like the XPan scarf . . . orange tie is too much, but the black T-shirt is cool . . . . . . Maybe the luxury accessories (or even reasonably priced) are the answer for increased revenues. Harley Davidson took back control of their brand name for retail products, and have done very well with the accessory market. Also, many surfboard companies barely make any money on surfboards, yet their clothing lines make enough money to fund further surfboard design, development, and production. [...] Or a Panasonic plastic lens in a camera badged Leica... ;-) Yeah! It is coming, and I will not be too surprised when it happens. Well blow me down if it hasn't happened already...! I didn't specifically mean Leica and Panasonic, more like the Hasselblad name on a P&S, though I wonder why that has not happened yet. . . . . . . . . I don't see it as all or nothing, so I guess that is largely where we differ. I see medium format cameras surviving as a niche product, much like large format. However, if the film is no longer produced for these cameras, then they will become nice things to stick on a shelf, and no more new sales. Well, where i think you are wrong is thinking that MF can survive as a niche product. It's future lies not in being a niche product. Being a niche product was their past. What we see happening is not a reduction from "main-stream" to niche products, but an evacuation of the niche: did it offer not very much in the past, the niche is now really running low. Victim of their own success . . . maybe if the older gear did not last so long there would have been a more continual purchase cycle. However, that is one for the business students to study in hindsight. What we see is not well-fed plain dwellers retiring to some well stored safe but tiny resort, but habitual niche dwellers losing their sustenance. (or some other insane mixed and incomplete metaphor like that ;-)) Just incomplete because the issues continue . . . . . . . . . . Maybe, but I see a change, rather than an extinction. ALPA is not high volume, nor high profit, yet they are still in business. [...] Hasselblad and Rollei and Mamiya and.. too are small volume firms still in business. But how about the future? ;-) Rollei will still be around, though I have no idea on where the price of their 6000 series will go. Mamiya is trying hardest of all, and have a few famous names behind them, so they might establish enough brand recognition to push other lines (digital P&S, co-branding, who knows?) . . . maybe even a partnership with Epson. So that leaves Hasselblad . . . a great brand name, but what direction? While the boutique is nice, I doubt many know about it. Perhaps Lambretta is the example for them. The famous name of the past no longer exists as scooters, but there is a successful clothing line. Placing the Hasselblad name to something else, increasing the name recognition, might be enough to continue camera production. Sounds crazy, but could work. An example of that craziness is BMW motorcycles. BMW claim to loose money on every motorcycle they make, yet they also claim to continue production because that is the history and heritage of the company. There is little to stop a company like Hasselblad from doing the same thing, and I don't think that would detract from the quality of the cameras they produce in the future (some might see this as *******izing, or whoring out of a brand). One thing that would be nice if your extinction prediction is correct is that used medium format should drop to really low prices, like a slightly used Hasselblad with normal lens for under $US 300, Mamiya RZ67 for $200, Rollei 6008 for $250, Bronica anything for $100 . . . . . maybe I should start looking at those Estate Sales . . . . . . . Or... People start hoarding, and prices will go through the roof? ;-) Evil thought . . . well, hopefully not . . . it would be nice to get an SWC and Biogon in a year or so for under $US 500. ;-) Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Formula for pre-focusing | Steve Yeatts | Large Format Photography Equipment | 9 | June 22nd 04 02:55 AM |
zone system test with filter on lens? | Phil Lamerton | In The Darkroom | 35 | June 4th 04 02:40 AM |