[rollei_list] Re: to Michael Eric.
- From: littlwing5@xxxxxxxxx
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 04:48:52 +0000
First off, I just want to let you know that I've been following the rollie list
for nearly four years now, and I've probably posted a total of 5 times if
that. This is the first post since my last which was about two years ago. I
must say that in my opinion your post hit it right on the nose. SPOT ON. I am
just a humble photographer myself who has shot with a 2.8 F an M2, 4x5, various
film slr's and now with a D200. I love shooting with film for play but to keep
with the pace of todays standards in the retail part of the photo biz, this is
where digital shines. Digital does have its flaws, but when you have deadlines
to meet and the studio is waiting for your day's work, film is just
impractical. I'm not bashing film or digital either, I'm just speaking from my
experiences and I can completely relate to what you've said about digital
feeding your family. Don't have a family yet myself, but digital definitely
gets my job done and pays my bills too. I just have to keep reminding myself
that a lot of posters here are not WORKING photographers like you and I and to
put up with such rubbish about digital vs film is just unprofessional and I
DON'T mean you. After reading what you had to share with us, it compelled me so
much that I had to write this myself. I think you just became my own personal
jesus christ. Thanks for sharing with us a slice of reality from a working
photographer's viewpoint.
Happy shooting.
Regards,
Michael Eric Sta. Maria
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Eric Berube <pj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:10:07
To:rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: FREE Tri-X
Will you agree with me that comparing APS-C sensor output and 4X5 negs
is comparing apples and oranges?
Kodak is sending me two rolls of TMax one will be 100 ISO and the other
400 ISO, both will be 35mm. What I said was my D300 will blow these free
rolls of new TMax away at 1600ISO in a 16X24 print. Sure this was a bit
cavalier and off the cuff, but I will not back pedal from it as an
exaggerated claim. I stand by what I've said. I've seen the quality of a
D300 at 1600ISO and know the grain in a two stop pushed roll of TMax
400. A D300, properly exposed, will produce a better (sharper, cleaner,
more defined and better colour/tones) image at 1600 ISO than any
properly exposed 35mm film at 1600ISO on the market today or ever.
Period. (and has the advantage of shooting in both colour and b&w at the
same time.)
You felt the need to add that a D300 image wouldn't stand up to a 4X5
neg at any sized print and something wonderfully macho about "kicking my
ass around the room" and then suggested that I'd "back peddle and claim
digital is faster and cheaper." I didn't (and wouldn't) try to claim
that an APS-C DSLR could hold up to the quality of a 4X5 neg.
Amateurs may think in your 'digital default mode' (Hel, most of them
think that their 12MP digicam is "2" better than my 10MP D200!) but any
working pro who has shot digital for more than one season realises that
Digital capture is most certainly not faster, and in no way is it
cheaper (again, for a professional.) Digital's primary advantage is its
superior quality in low light use and the far greater control that it
offers me over my final product. IF I were a hobbiest with a 'real job'
or a Fine Art photographer, I may have all the time and money in the
world to spend in a darkroom on one or two prints a day, but I am a
Wedding photographer and occasional Photojournalist. I need to create
consistent work in marketable quantity and quality usually from less
than ideal lighting situations (dark churches, no flash allowed.) If I
were still shooting film and relying on a lab to produce this work for
me, it would definitely be faster (drop my film off and pick it up when
it is done) and wouldn't cost me nearly as much (considering the time
spent in post = lots of money) BUT I'd also have little to no control
over two thirds of 'my' photographic process and my low light photos
would not meet my or my client's quality expectations. Basic economics
simply do not support souping my own negs and printing my own prints,
nor even having someone else soup and scan the negs. In the quantity
that I'm called on to produce from the available darkness that I'm
called on to work in, using colour or b&w film in any format is simply
impractical.
I'm not here to bash film nor digital either. Nothing to feel threatened
about or really to argue over.
Digital capture feeds and clothes my family and I LOVE film in both my
Rollei MX-EVS and my Leica IIIf RD (and Retina IIIC and Ziess Ikon...)
My local lab does a decent job of souping and scanning negs for me to
play with one or two rolls once in a while.
I just can't feed my family using film in this market any longer as it
doesn't meet my needs. That's all. :)
Peace be with you,
Michael Eric Berube
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
- » [rollei_list] Re: to Michael Eric.
