Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/08/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mxsmanic, Whoever your are, it's pretty clear that you're strongly opinionated, know little about professional photography and have consistently baited or attacked individuals on this list. Want covers? Go to a magazine stand and look it over. Pick up the phone and call magazines like the New Yorker, virtually all high-quality fashion mags, aviation mags, car mags, etc., and ask them what they use for portraiture. Call a Kodak pro representative. Yes, 35mm is very prevalent for photojournalism, action photography, action portraiture and, of course, amateur use. Product shots, cover shots, etc., etc., etc., are done in MF for reasons that I simply don't want to waste more of my (or others) time debating with you. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Mxsmanic Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 10:08 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica Quality versus Medium Format George writes: > Many, many of my friends and acquaintances > in the industry shoot for some of the leading > mags. Which magazines? > Covers -- especially product/people covers -- are > almost uniformly medium or even large format. Which covers? > Perhaps, after a few years in the industry, you'll > reconsider your opinion. I'm not sure what industry you have in mind, but it has been the years I've spent in photography that taught me how prevalent 35mm is, and now digital is becoming very prevalent, too. Some old-world editors may still prefer MF, but since MF quality cannot be reproduced on even the best magazine covers, it is a pointless anachronism.