[Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG

[tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant)]

Walt Johnson asked:
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG


> Ted
> I am curious as to one thing. While most of this arcane jargon is familiar 
> to me does any of it make better images?<<<

Walt,
I don't think so. Because all the "after the fact digital processing" is 
basically a form of "darkroom manipulation" and if the photographer hasn't 
caught the perfect moment in the first place all the jargon stuff wont make 
it a better content photograph.

>> Are any of the images ( and I am including long-time pro shooters in 
>> this) better with
> digital?<<<

Possibly, but digital is still just a form of capture as is different types 
of film.  It still comes down to the ability of the shooter to see and 
re-act to the visual motivation in the first place. And if he or she is a 
klutz picture taker using film, it isn't going to change because of digital.

>Damn, I got PS a long, long time back. Love using it and don't miss a 
>darkroom at all, even though I spend years in them.<<

I'm still a somewhat novice in PS but I manage to get it to work to make 
prints that get sold.:-) And keep clients happy, so that's all that matters. 
Like you I don't miss the darkroom one iota.

>My M6's become digital when I scan the films. Scan the darn film and save 
>as tiffs. Would it be better to shoot with an M8 and save as raw. Will an 
>M8 at max performance give better quality than a M6 with a roll of 
>Velvia?<<<

Questions you'll have to answer yourself mon ami. ;-)

> Aside from the immediate gratification of looking at the images as you go 
> along I'd guess the M6/Velvia/AdobePS has quite an edge.<<<<

But today, clients, art directors and photo editors want the end result 
almost before it happens. And if one isn't into digital as a professional 
photographer you'll find out shortly you'll become an unemployed 
professional photographer very quickly.

The old routine of "I'll have proof sheets for you tomorrow" doesn't wash 
much these days. And as digital cameras and methods are improving so rapidly 
the quality is also improving, so hardly any need for film. Great for some 
folks but only if there's no deadline involved.

>Both in the end result and the effective cost. $5000 for a freaking body 
>strikes me as a bean counters delight. I've been on a lot of assignments 
>over the years and had to repair equipment on return. A bag full of M8s 
>could finance a hell of a retirement, to your own Island. :-)

No question!:-)  A wonderful island to live on! :-) :-) Tha's why I'm here! 
;-)

I also think camera cost today is beyond reality, but as we did with film 
cameras they too were seen as costly and over priced back in the good old 
days. However we got them because they were better tools just as digital is 
today. It's sort of "get over it because it ain't going to change!" And we 
have to accept it or quit.

>>One other thing.....Would you be a bit bothered by having a nice 50 1.4 
>>Summilux which has to >>loose some of its usefulness when put on an M8. Or 
>>worse, a 21 2.8 ASPH?<<<

Naw because if one doesn't think about this and fixes the "problem" with a 
step back or closer it's all the same. Besides new lenses to give the equal 
coverage will be a long soon so the "not the same coverage on an M8" will 
become a non-issue.

> I don't know the answers but certainly have the questions. Am I just old 
> and set in my ways, much like many of the seniors were when I got started 
> in the biz?<<<

Walt, old is merely a figment of ones imagination. ;-) But then there are 
those mornings when you "really know yer old!" Damn aches and pains where 
one never thought possible. :-)

Like you, we've put a lot of work time in shooting assignments beyond the 
wildest dreams of most on the list. So of course we're set in our ways which 
makes it harder to move into the new realm of digital and attendant 
machinery. Not to forget the learning neurons don't fire as fast as they 
once did. So software, hardware and no where creates confusion far more than 
a Speed Graphic, a sheet of film or a 35mm camera and a roll with 
processing.

But I'm glad I can still use a camera, digital, because it's just another 
camera and if one doesn't think about it while wasting time with all the doo 
dads but shoot away to your heart's delight, it's still a great fun time to 
be a photojournalist.

Think about it too much? And it all becomes a big pain in the ass and I 
almost ask myself.... "where are the film Leica's?" ;-)

ted