David Alan Harvey on Leica M10 and iPhone

Ko.Fe. said:
Selling workshop statement by me means nothing but act of marketing. Telling to person what iPhone will do for seminar and money are better spend on paying for seminar rather than for M10 is the act of selling. It is part where it is good
Click to expand...

He did not say anything of the sort. You are reading into it in a cynical way. He never said do not buy that new camera because you should take my workshop. He only spoke to the camera part.

The bad part is to insist what no difference between iPhone and M10 is visible on large book prints. It is bad marketing trick, because is is false on technical side.
Click to expand...

There is a difference technically. However, is there a difference conceptually?

And it is not offensive to suggest what person making this assumptions on IQ is not lair, but person who needs eyes to be checked.
Click to expand...

I think DAH's eyes are just fine.
 
John; most of this has been hashed over and sides were taken. But, on the book..

I haven't seen it. Is it a big book? Meaning double trucked 12x18" pages or bigger? The new HTC U11/Zeiss phone has a DxOMark rating of 89, I believe. Not bad for a 12 MP non Camera. I think images printed in current digital lithography media would hold up to a 20 MP camera file. As would both, reduced to social media file sizes.

Dave Harvey has seen a lot of his photographs in print. I'll bet he wouldn't make a statement like that unless it were accurate. If you want to go to traditional digital printing methods, you surely could see a difference between a 12MP phone image and a 20MP camera image. Print bigger, and the difference becomes more obvious.

With most of my 35mm film, darkroom printed, I never exceeded 11x14 until I got into gallery stuff. Most everything looked fine at 11x14. The repro prints I made for press were almost always 8x10, and made great double trucked (11x16) lithography printed pages.

So, my guess is - that Harvey isn't BSing at all.
https://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/HTC-U11-Mobile-review-The-new-DxOMark-leader

Oh, No! A LEICA PHONE.. The Sky is Falling..
https://petapixel.com/2017/07/27/leicas-owner-dreams-true-leica-phone/

Modern lytho printing
https://www.heidelberg.com/global/e...75/product_information_2/speedmaster_xl_1.jsp
 
When the fixation centres on the technical comparisons of an iPhone image vs an M10, for example, have we lost our way ? I will always take a strong photograph that moves me, over a technically superior photo. 24/7/365. Bar none
 
jsrockit said:
1. He did not say anything of the sort. You are reading into it in a cynical way. He never said do not buy that new camera because you should take my workshop. He only spoke to the camera part.

2.There is a difference technically. However, is there a difference conceptually?

3. I think DAH's eyes are just fine.
Click to expand...

Thanks for commenting.

1. We (those who sell or used to sell) do tell things which are not looks like act of sale, but it is. In some cultures, btw, if you want to sell, you can't talk about the sale directly first, but you are starting of selling it by talking about other things.
I can't reply to you with facts on selling of seminar part, since OP is deleted. We have to leave this part for now, instead of speculating on "he said, your said, I was saying".

2. Conceptually I see pictures in my head. In my head conceptual pictures are blur and lith. Or they are heavily combined color pictures with sharp mix of impossible objects. Like Dali paintings.
The problem I have is what I can't bring my conceptual pictures on print. Even after I worked as paid computer graphic artist. I'm not so interested in someone else conceptual exercises due to this as well. I have enough of it in my head.

3. Well, then my eyes are not fine then. My eyes are not aligned with the common set of eyes, it seems. This is why I think it is my case:
In the local library we have Ansel Adams book. Small book, which is published with special and authorized control. I'm not AA follower. I'm not landscaper, still life photographer. But his little book is astonishing to my wrong set of non conceptional eyes of person who spend years on technical aspects of computer processed images for TV, commercials and movies. I was keep on thinking why those tiny photos are so astonishing to me... Two technical factors are involved. Special printing of the book to insure the highest quality. And highest I ever seen quality of originals (scene light extremely well taken on exposure, negative and prints are superior). The funny thing, as result impression my non-DAH set of eyes gives me from this book is strange. The images in Ansel Adams book feels like art to me. Like some classic paintings quality, to be exact.

Yes, I rather see some paintings, film photography as art, then mix of mobile phone and M9 pictures book of visions. For now digital is all the same to me. My artistic vision on digital is weak, I'm admitting it. For some here it is terribly wrong. But is it wrong to be an artist who prefers analog media? Is person who paint instead of taking it with the phone a gearhead, just because this person prefers some media over another media?

Cheers, Ko.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Yes, I rather see some paintings, film photography as art, then mix of mobile phone and M9 pictures book of visions. For now digital is all the same to me. My artistic vision on digital is weak, I'm admitting it. For some here it is terribly wrong. But is it wrong to be an artist who prefers analog media? Is person who paint instead of taking it with the phone a gearhead, just because this person prefers some media over another media?
Click to expand...

I'm not the type that thinks art has to do with technical concerns. I don't have those hang-ups. I can look at good photograph made on film, phones, digital cameras, polaroid, etc. I'm more interested in the ideas behind the photos than technical concerns. Oh course if an idea isn't executed well, then it's not going to matter what one uses.
 
jsrockit said:
Nah, not clickbait... for many people that are only into snapshots and selfies, it IS the camera to use. For those of us that enjoy photography and like to get more involved in the process, it's not the end of DSLRs, rangefinders, SLRs, mirrorless, etc.
Click to expand...

Hi John; I met the title. One phone model won't likely kill off a whole camera type. I think phone cameras have had a big effect on low end consumer camera sales. The camera makers are way ahead of the public on this as it's about their survival.

The EFV cameras are changing lots of stuff (EVF + OVF is best I think). But, most photographers want some sort of view finder and they aren't found on phones and most point and shoots.
 
Now the non existent (really a Leica) Leica Camera phone has some stiff competition from the nonexistent Red Camera Phone (said to be in production?).

Who will win this war of nonexistent products? The Red Camera has a Round Red LOGO, just like the round red logo sported by Leica products. Is this an infringement on red round logos in the world of Cameraness?

Will the Leica loyal battle it out with the "any red logo is cool" people over these nonexistent products?

If Leica makes a phone camera is it a camera?

One Red prototype looks more "camera like" than "phone like". The phones are modular just like all Red Cameras.

https://petapixel.com/2017/08/02/hands-red-hydrogen-one-1200-holographic-smartphone/
 
Well I would say Leica has an advantage over RED on the dot issue...they will be able to release a special edition with a...black dot! :)

Of course Black Magic will probably enter the market as well...

Most folks see what they want to see...and the beat goes on!
 
Contarama said:
Well I would say Leica has an advantage over RED on the dot issue...they will be able to release a special edition with a...black dot! :)

Of course Black Magic will probably enter the market as well...

Most folks see what they want to see...and the beat goes on!
Click to expand...

I think Black Magic is a group of former Red employees who didn't move to LA when Red did. Jim Jannard, Red's founder, is really wealthy and has the business connections to raise private funds and compete with the big players if he has a unique or better product. Jannard is a designer, and a good one. The Red Cameras are now main stream in feature film production. I looks like Jannard has an idea that will be funded.

He's an interesting guy.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chloes...one-red-digital-camera-hologram/#34321071713b


This is Jannard's web page. He's a decent photographer.
http://jannard.com/

x
 
DrMcCoy said:
No, Blackmagic Design has been making video hardware and editing programs out of Melbourne since 1984 - a full 21 years before Red was founded.
Click to expand...

Didn't know that. Have they moved their operation to sil valley?

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/company

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackmagic_Design

I wonder if they manufacture in multi countries? I don't mean parts sourcing. I don't know how much presence Red has in Fremont, CA. Their new studio in LA is a big hit. It's getting a lot of use.


x
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom