David_Manning
Well-known
http://www.fotoflock.com/index.php/features/feature-interviews/30/2723
Steve's been a huge Kodachrome user and Nikon F100 shooter. Seem's he's embraced digital and is not looking back. His reasonings are sound, and definitely good enough for him.
I post this as I struggle to bring my own wet-printed b&w negatives some consistency...
Steve's been a huge Kodachrome user and Nikon F100 shooter. Seem's he's embraced digital and is not looking back. His reasonings are sound, and definitely good enough for him.
I post this as I struggle to bring my own wet-printed b&w negatives some consistency...
antiquark
Derek Ross
jwcat
Well-known
He has an exhibit here in Central Florida now, I have been there three times. Oddly , since he talks about Epson printers, the prints here are labeled "Chromogenic (Lambda) " prints.
I have mentioned before, I do not usually care for large color prints, but his are on a different plane.
I have mentioned before, I do not usually care for large color prints, but his are on a different plane.
Turtle
Veteran
If I shot colour I would shoot digital too. For B&W I still subjectively prefer film, but I dont face the logistical issues he would either.
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
I'm going to be a complete douche here....
I'm sorry to have to say it, but i have not liked the work of two of my favorite photographers (David Alan Harvey and Steve McCurry) nearly as much since they started shooting digital.
I'm sorry to have to say it, but i have not liked the work of two of my favorite photographers (David Alan Harvey and Steve McCurry) nearly as much since they started shooting digital.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Both have moved on. Both are shooting different stuff these days.
DAH is 65 years old. McCurry 59.
I don't think it's the move to digital that has changed their work as it is life and the reality of getting older.
DAH is 65 years old. McCurry 59.
I don't think it's the move to digital that has changed their work as it is life and the reality of getting older.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
59 is not old ... 
. Nor is 65. I know you said "older", not old ... but perhaps it's more about mental, emotional and spiritual evolution than the passage of time.
I haven't seen McCurrey's latest/digital work, but now I will.
Still and all, I doubt I would ever prefer any colour medium "better" than Kodachrome.
. Nor is 65. I know you said "older", not old ... but perhaps it's more about mental, emotional and spiritual evolution than the passage of time.I haven't seen McCurrey's latest/digital work, but now I will.
Still and all, I doubt I would ever prefer any colour medium "better" than Kodachrome.
David_Manning
Well-known
It seems like many of the classic NGS photographers have faded into the landscape. I'm not convinced it's a question of switching equipment, but perhaps there is something to the fact that photography budgets are shrinking drastically, and many photographic subjects have been covered extensively already.
Steve McCurry does a lot of commercial stuff now, which pays MUCH better than an NGS salary. Follow the money.
I like McCurry very much and DAH, but it seems the current trend at the geographic for photography has followed other photojournalism...lots of distorted close-in wide angle stuff. A lot of the more artful photography has faded and been reduced to ultra-wide-zoom PJ-style.
Quickly watch the slide show that plays here http://www.nationalgeographicassignment.com/...I would hazard a guess that most of those shots were made with a 35mm or 28mm lens. These days, everything is made with the 14-24 or 17-35.
It would be nice to see NGM return to it's heyday of the 80's and commission photographers with a more graceful, art-filled eye. I think bucking the ultra-wide PJ trend would, once again, set their photography apart and make it more memorable. Certainly, my own opinion
Steve McCurry does a lot of commercial stuff now, which pays MUCH better than an NGS salary. Follow the money.
I like McCurry very much and DAH, but it seems the current trend at the geographic for photography has followed other photojournalism...lots of distorted close-in wide angle stuff. A lot of the more artful photography has faded and been reduced to ultra-wide-zoom PJ-style.
Quickly watch the slide show that plays here http://www.nationalgeographicassignment.com/...I would hazard a guess that most of those shots were made with a 35mm or 28mm lens. These days, everything is made with the 14-24 or 17-35.
It would be nice to see NGM return to it's heyday of the 80's and commission photographers with a more graceful, art-filled eye. I think bucking the ultra-wide PJ trend would, once again, set their photography apart and make it more memorable. Certainly, my own opinion
emraphoto
Veteran
i like NG. i like 35's and 28's in particulair. i continue to see what i would call brilliant work out of NG. different opinions i suppose.
Andy Kibber
Well-known
^ I agree. There's usually one or two really good photos in an issue of NG.
More than I would say of most magazines.
As for who uses what, where you're shooting the equivalent of 800-1000 rolls of film for a project, digital makes a lot of sense.
More than I would say of most magazines.
As for who uses what, where you're shooting the equivalent of 800-1000 rolls of film for a project, digital makes a lot of sense.
David_Manning
Well-known
I DO like NG Magazine. They DO have great photography (not enough of it, of course). But I don't see the style and quality of photography that I did when Sam Abell, David Alan Harvey, Steve McCurry, et al were staff photographers.
And I agree...I think the 35 and 28 (and even the 50) are perfect focal lengths for reportage.
). But I don't see the style and quality of photography that I did when Sam Abell, David Alan Harvey, Steve McCurry, et al were staff photographers. And I agree...I think the 35 and 28 (and even the 50) are perfect focal lengths for reportage.
craygc
Well-known
Personally, in general I do like Steve McCurry's work, but I must agree I do prefer his film work over the digital - not for content but for its appearance.
I will first admit that I don't understand what he is or is not allowed to use on his website http://www.stevemccurry.com/ but I just feel that if you're shooting the equivalent of 800~100 rolls per project I would expect "all" your displayed images to be exceptional. While I think there are exceptional shots on his site I would not use that as a term to describe the entire collection. Did I mention that I do like Steve's work very much!!!
The other interesting I thing I have noticed from the images on his web site is that a significant number of them are a long way from having any sense of a white-point. This is not a guess but from analysing quite a number.
I will first admit that I don't understand what he is or is not allowed to use on his website http://www.stevemccurry.com/ but I just feel that if you're shooting the equivalent of 800~100 rolls per project I would expect "all" your displayed images to be exceptional. While I think there are exceptional shots on his site I would not use that as a term to describe the entire collection. Did I mention that I do like Steve's work very much!!!
The other interesting I thing I have noticed from the images on his web site is that a significant number of them are a long way from having any sense of a white-point. This is not a guess but from analysing quite a number.