Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/04/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Yep. My wife and I went on a trip with National Geo photographers in the film days. I had my M-3 and lenses and maybe six rolls of film. I was amazed at how many rolls the pros went through. Now we went on a week trip and I came back with 1,200 images (33 rolls of film). I thought I was pretty selective but that edited down to about 20 photos to keep. I read an article the other day stating that Salgado never looks at the back of the camera after taking a photo...not me, I'll take everything the technology has. Ken On 4/8/2014 6:59 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote: > The idea that one is going to get better pix in the end because one knows > that we have to shoot LESS mystifies me. > The bottom line in getting excellent results in photography has always > been > Converge and > Working it. > And it was easier to do that with 36 on a roll than it was with 12. Or with > sheet film. Much more of a chance of capturing that magic moment and magic > camera angle. .. than standing there going "click" and walking away. > > I have never been more excited about my work. And the fact of getting 360 > or > 3600 or more on a roll has done nothing but positive things for my work. > > On internet chat groups you'll read all about "overshooting" > Trust me that concept did not exist before 10 years ago. > Its a product of internet photography chat groups. > > A photographer comes back to their studio with their take and looks at it > all and goes "damn! I wish I'd done a few more of those I may have not > quite > gotten it and damn! I wish I'd done a few more of those!" > Never "damn I took too many of those!" that's an occurrence which just > doesn't happen. > > > On 4/8/14 7:43 PM, "Jacky aus" <jackyaus at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Adam and Ted, >> >> Thank you very much for giving such a good explanation in great patience >> and tolerance, especially for non-techies. Does it mean that we need to be >> SMART techie guy (knowing and understanding all variety of techie >> craps...) before we take the full power, advantages and beauties of >> digital >> camera and lens.... It seems to me that if I were SMART techie craps, my >> pictures will go better, brighter and brilliant .... >> >> We are going and moving into digital world, leaving the CLASSIC film >> behind, even though FILM has been working with us for so long. >> >> To be frank, I still love FILM as it teaches and motivates me to think >> more >> and innovate more before I press my valuable shutter button in precise and >> artistic ways.... >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jacky >> >> >> >> >> >> On 9 April 2014 08:52, Adam Bridge <abridge at mac.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Ted, >>> >>> With our M8's it's not so much of an issue because the sensor is smaller. >>> The weird things happen out at the edges where the light comes in at a >>> steeper angle. >>> >>> When you think of a sensor on a digital camera you need to think of the >>> light-sensitive part living down in a pit. Sort of like you're standing >>> at >>> the bottom of a well looking up at the sky. Light from the back of the >>> lens >>> spreads across the sensor. If you're in the middle then you get all the >>> light. But out the edges the light hits the side of the pit and doesn't >>> make it to the bottom. >>> >>> The answer is to put a small lens (they call them "micro-lenses" at the >>> top of the pit which gathers the light and directs it down to the bottom. >>> But the design of that lens would have to be different for each lens you >>> mount on your camera. What to do? Well, every camera has a small computer >>> in it to handle taking the electronic information from each little sensor >>> location and using that in some rather complex ways to organize it into a >>> "picture" that makes sense. If the computer knows that you've got a 24mm >>> f2 >>> lens on it can adjust for both how the light from the lens reaches the >>> sensor at the bottom of each pit AND it can even adjust for known >>> problems >>> in the design of that particular lens! >>> >>> Of course with film this isn't a problem. With black and white film the >>> layer of light-sensitive particles is very thin while for color the >>> different layers are still very thin - no pits! >>> >>> I hope this helps. I could probably do a neat little illustration if it >>> would help you. >>> >>> It IS very complicated. We're still at that awkward phase of technology >>> where exactly how to do the engineering is being worked out in an almost >>> minute by minute advance. Film, however, has been a mature technology for >>> decades. Now, if you had started out in photography in the 19th century >>> you'd have done much the same except you'd be worried about wet plates, >>> or >>> dry plates, or film, or different formats. That all settled down with a >>> few >>> formats and lots of well-understood chemistry to make it all happen. Just >>> think about the different developers used on something like Tri-X and all >>> the discussions on this list about which was best and how to get the >>> optimum result. >>> >>> That's happening all over again but its even more complex now. But, I >>> think, it'll start to get simpler again. When my grandson (now 6 months >>> old) is our age.... >>> >>> Happy snaps! As always I read all of your posts and am deeply grateful >>> for >>> them, even when you're feeling cantankerous. <grin> >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> On 2014 Apr 7, at 6:56 PM, tedgrant at shaw.ca wrote: >>> >>>> I shoot with my M8 and whatever lens it maybe, my images look just super >>> fine while printing 13X19 size prints. So is there some kind of >>> situation? >>> Lighting effect? Whatever? A situation where I can shoot a scene and see >>> a >>> diffeence. I'll rent a coded lens or maybe someone living near by has one >>> I'll ask a loan for a few hours or so. And shoot with both non-coded and >>> coded. >>>> Maybe that'll make me see the errors of my anti-coding rants! >>>> thank you. >>>> cheers, >>>> ted >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > >