jsrockit
Moderator
Right Cal, that is for one device (filters) ...the Monochrome. Also, there are other ways to avoid clipping. However, I concede, you obviously know more about digital files than I do. 😉
what's considered a digital looking image?
- Thread starter back alley
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 221
- Views 21K
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
I agree. There's only two types of music: Good; and Bad.
But... I see a distortion of truth here because some people are passing judgments on digital because of either poor sampling (never knew there was such a thing as "Master Digital Printer") or because of passing judgement a bad sampling of bad examples that were made not even with a good exposure.
Consider that with my Monochrom that I can get high ISO performance that I can only dream about with using film; consider that I can print bigger because of higher resolution; also consider that I get performance that either meets or exceeds IQ that I can get with medium format film cameras.
BTW I own 5 Leicas, but more medium format cameras.
Cal
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
John,
All I know in my limited experience with the Monochrom is that I can reduce and control clipping that is basically lost information by using filters. I'm a B&W shooter and use filters all the time.
Also when are you getting your Monochrom? 🙂
You also get the point exactly, in that control of exposure, like underexposing, records more data and avoids clipping. Klaus for example uses filters on his Monochrom and also underexposes. I use no filter factor so basically I'm doing the same. This is easy to do, so why all the bad examples giving digital a bad name? Makes no sense to me.
Cal
back alley
IMAGES
which is the reason i asked the question...to ferret out that information of what it means to people.
jsrockit
Moderator
I don't doubt it... however, for those of us who don't have a monochrome... there are other methods (unless one is too much of a snob to use them).
Never. Are you insinuating that I couldn't possibly know how to PP with this camera. Sure, using filters the old way is different in digital. However, the rest is similar. Then again, I'm not afraid of post processing.
Exposure in general is a simple concept. Some people focus too much on technical concerns and some people don't focus enough on them. The internet allows both to have an opinion. My point is that, as always, there is no one way to do photography.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
John,
Just remembering when you PM'ed me about having GAS for a Monochrom. 🙂 I'm totally a a nube, but that's what is so much fun. It didn't take me long to love my Monochrom. Leica really built the perfect camera for me with me in mind.
Cal
jsrockit
Moderator
Yeah, Cal... I was joking. You know I'm way too cheap to buy a Monochrome! 😉 It's a beautiful camera though and I'm glad I get to see results by living vicariously through your use of it.
clayne
shoot film or die
- Local time
- 1:46 PM
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2008
- Messages
- 763
You're confusing dinking around in photoshop and Lightroom with actual hands on one-of-a-kind darkroom work. Ever watched a master darkroom printer work? It's a trade that involves zero computers, total commitment, and a relationship with the materials.
Biggest key: no computers, monitors, keyboards, or other nonsense. Just raw organic art making.
back alley
IMAGES
Photo_Smith
Well-known
He's 100% correct. Or would you care to make an unsharp mask with film or in Photoshop?
Which one is more craft driven, more hand on? Could you describe how to USM with film? Which one takes more skill?
Digital is easier workflow wise, I was a master analogue printer; Photoshop made things so simple for me, just seeing the results on the screen of a +5M -7Y without having to make a test print-imagine that.
Just my experience.
back alley
IMAGES
i don't believe in extreme positions...
Photo_Smith
Well-known
Not really extreme though is it? Just basic common sense. As a handprinter I can see how the digital darkroom has lowered the bar for results for the average person.
Photoshop and inkjets with canned profiles gets you a level of control only an elite had in the film days.
Doing something as esoteric as USM or making film profiles and mapping them to papers took immense skill, and a shedload of time. I could describe how to make a USM with film but I'm sure you get the point.
Doing those things with an all analogue workflow (film chemistry and paper) especially in colour, was a real craft practised by few, digital has opened that up to just about anyone.
Photoshop and inkjets with canned profiles gets you a level of control only an elite had in the film days.
Doing something as esoteric as USM or making film profiles and mapping them to papers took immense skill, and a shedload of time. I could describe how to make a USM with film but I'm sure you get the point.
Doing those things with an all analogue workflow (film chemistry and paper) especially in colour, was a real craft practised by few, digital has opened that up to just about anyone.
redisburning
Well-known
would you like some freshly cracked pepper on your butthurt?
back alley
IMAGES
well, if your going to be reasonable about it...😉
i just dislike the attitude (not yours) of some when it comes to comparing the digital process to a film process.
i spent 30 years in the darkroom, developing my b&w negs and making prints...i have an idea of what it's like in there...
yes, digital is an easier process when it comes to manual labour but no less artistic or substantive than film.
Sejanus.Aelianus
Veteran
There are always people who resent a hard earned skill being superseded by technology. Unfortunately, the resentment sometimes comes out as aggression.
Michael Markey
Veteran
Succinctly put.
clayne
shoot film or die
- Local time
- 1:46 PM
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2008
- Messages
- 763
Conversely, why use a Leica when any Nikon or Canon can pump out the same results quicker and of the same quality? Anyone here should realize the equivalent absurdity of the above statement. Ironic how it doesn't go both ways here.
If you can't identity why someone hand printing an image on silver paper innately involves more raw commitment and "art" than someone shifting sliders around with a mouse, then you're already a slave to the computer as it is.
Digital printing is less of an art because it inherently involves lower risk and commitment to achieve the same goals. There is NO UNDO in the darkroom. You screw it up, you do it all over.
I take it there's quite a few people on this board who just can't hack a lake of fire approach to things and try to form all sorts of subjective justifications on how the innately lesser skilled route is somehow on par, artistically, with the one that takes more work, time, and hands on expertise.
This thread is a perfect example of it.
If you can't identity why someone hand printing an image on silver paper innately involves more raw commitment and "art" than someone shifting sliders around with a mouse, then you're already a slave to the computer as it is.
Digital printing is less of an art because it inherently involves lower risk and commitment to achieve the same goals. There is NO UNDO in the darkroom. You screw it up, you do it all over.
I take it there's quite a few people on this board who just can't hack a lake of fire approach to things and try to form all sorts of subjective justifications on how the innately lesser skilled route is somehow on par, artistically, with the one that takes more work, time, and hands on expertise.
This thread is a perfect example of it.
back alley
IMAGES
art is in the eye and mind of the creator...not in the tools and process of the creation.
rluka
Established
If you don't meet any hardship making it, then it doesn't worth 🙂
Apply to everything until someone find great argument to forever break "no pain no gain"
Apply to everything until someone find great argument to forever break "no pain no gain"
back alley
IMAGES
i'm not a big fan of pain...😉
Similar threads
