Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I looked at the photo you refer to and it looks, at first glance, as good as something off a PhotoCD. Very high quality! At 07:06 AM 4/9/98 +0200, Alan Ball wrote: >When I started this, I certainly did not expect it to turn into such an >agressive thread. The doubts I expressed were related to the rendition of a >few images published on a Web page. The link to that Web page was >communicated to the LUG by a LUG member under the subject field "Cool Leica >Pictures". > >After visiting that page and looking carefully at the images, I had a >reaction that I have often had looking at images on the Web: they render >poorly under my (quite standard) digital and Web visualizing tools. The Web >technology strips the 'technology' added value out of them IMHO. I maintain >that they would not have rendered very differently ON THE WEB if they had >been shot through a low price P/S. You are well aware that there are good >quality low price P/S options out there. They do not require flash on every >image, they have good lenses, opening at f2.8, with good contrast and >definition, with low flare, they have good metering systems, and quite >frankly you can get good 'decisive moment' images out of them, even if it >is much easier to do so with a M6. > >So, this thread was about the dangers of using the Web as a showcase >vehicle in the framework of exchanges related to the illustration of the >high potential of Leica (or Nicapentolta). > >Some answers to the questions I raised have given useful information on >compression technology and new file formats, others have insisted on the >fact that each Web user owning a Leica should at the very least own a high >end graphical workstation before surfing the Web. > >As I have suggested in an earlier post here, please visit the Nikon Coolpix >900 page. It could have published under a page called 'Cool leica >Pictures', and I believe most of us/you LUGgers would have waxed extatic on >how beautiful they are. They really are. ON THE WEB. Check: >http://www.nikonusa.com/products/imaging/images/moosebird.jpg and the other >images in that folder. > >Alan >Brussels-Belgium > > >On Thursday, April 09, 1998 1:24 AM, Robert Rose [SMTP:RJR@usip.com] wrote: >> I have been watching this thread with some disbelief. >> >> How could anyone claim that these pictures could have been taken with a >P&S camera? >> >> The focus motor, shutter, flash pop, and wind level on most P&S is so >loud that the subject would be distracted. The zoom motor sound would have >made the boy look at the camera, and the woman turn her head, turning the >image into a diary record, something ! >> other than what it is now. >> >> The flare of most P&S cameras would have made shooting with the light >bulbs in the field impossible. >> >> I could go on, but these are exactly what they are billed: really cool >Leica images. >> >> Case in point. My daughter was the Wicked Witch in the school production >of Wizard of Oz. I had a 90mm Elmarit-M on an M6, shooting with NHGII 800, >no flash, mostly at f/2.8. Good friend next to me had her P&S ready. When >her daughter (munchkin) came ou! >> t, up she jumps, wooor, click, snap, flash pop, buzz, then HORRORS END OF >ROLL buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz to rewind, while everyone looks at her in >disbelief. I lift M6, silently click off shot of munchkin. >> >> When I saw her next she sighed, "my picture didn't turn out so good." I >handed her the picture of her daughter. Her reply? >> >> You guessed it: "Oh, my God, look at this picture!" And then, "when did >you take this?" >> >> I rest my case. >> >> Bob >> > Francesco Sanfilippo, Five Senses Productions webmaster@5senses.com http://www.5senses.com/