This article is worth your time....

Discussion in 'Exposure Discussion' started by dwdmguy, Apr 30, 2009.

  1. dwdmguy

    dwdmguy Member

    Messages:
    818
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Location:
    Freehold, NJ
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
  2. Andy K

    Andy K Member

    Messages:
    9,422
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Sunny Southe
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What a thoroughly enjoyable read! Thank you for linking it.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 30, 2009
  3. Dave Martiny

    Dave Martiny Member

    Messages:
    122
    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thanks for the great article. I don't have much credibility as a critic of digital because I've never really used it, so it's always encouraging to me when someone who has professional experience with both mediums comes out with so many good things to say about film.

    Regards,

    Dave
     
  4. 36cm2

    36cm2 Member

    Messages:
    584
    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Location:
    Northeast U.
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8330/4.3.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)

    Definitely worth the read.thanks
     
  5. colrehogan

    colrehogan Member

    Messages:
    2,016
    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, M
    Shooter:
    Large Format Pan
    I agree.
     
  6. Christopher Walrath

    Christopher Walrath Member

    Messages:
    7,114
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Location:
    In a darkroo
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Great recommendation, Tom. Thank you very much.
     
  7. AshenLight

    AshenLight Member

    Messages:
    156
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2007
    Location:
    Northeastern
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Excellent article. Thanks...

    Ash
     
  8. naeroscatu

    naeroscatu Subscriber

    Messages:
    858
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Location:
    Newmarket On
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Oh my, finally a film topic as refreshing as a morning shower:smile:
     
  9. Cheryl Jacobs

    Cheryl Jacobs Member

    Messages:
    1,717
    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Location:
    Denver, Colo
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
  10. BobNewYork

    BobNewYork Member

    Messages:
    1,067
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Location:
    Long Island,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    And it's all absolutely true. Wonderful article - but maybe the toothpaste is out of the tube. It's all quantity and little quality nowadays.

    Bob H
     
  11. jovo

    jovo Membership Council

    Messages:
    4,124
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Location:
    Jacksonville
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well written and fun....and apparently all too true for the professional commercial photographer as well as the "artist".
     
  12. mike c

    mike c Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,199
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2009
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    A breath of fresh air, Tuck is doing a 360 degree turn not a 180 since He started with film

    mike c..
     
  13. Sirius Glass

    Sirius Glass Subscriber

    Messages:
    19,476
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Great article. I really enjoyed it.

    Thank you for posting the link.

    Steve
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. dwdmguy

    dwdmguy Member

    Messages:
    818
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Location:
    Freehold, NJ
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I'm very glad you guys and gals enjoyed it.
    Best to each of you.
     
  16. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,220
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It is interesting that he wrote it first in 2007, but just recently added it to his blog.

    Matt
     
  17. dwdmguy

    dwdmguy Member

    Messages:
    818
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Location:
    Freehold, NJ
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I know Matt, I saw that as well but it may just prove he is "ahead" of his time. (as I see a big fad coming on) so that would mean we, were behind the times and by being stedfast we are ahead of our time..... :smile:
     
  18. perkeleellinen

    perkeleellinen Member

    Messages:
    2,255
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Location:
    Warwickshire
    Shooter:
    35mm
    It was a very good read with some good comments at the end too. I totally agreed with this:
     
  19. TimVermont

    TimVermont Subscriber

    Messages:
    427
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Boston
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What a nice read. Thanks for posting the link.
     
  20. Jeff Kubach

    Jeff Kubach Member

    Messages:
    6,932
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Location:
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What a great article. So true!

    Jeff
     
  21. Early Riser

    Early Riser Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,611
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Location:
    USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Good article, and a good read. What Kirk talks about I have been hearing from many of my former advertising photography peers; many clients are asking for film, not digital. Maybe we have finally gotten to the point where both film and digital can coexist successfully, not with film being viewed as a slowly dying technology with it's respirator and feeding tube about to get pulled, but as an true and long term viable option when a non digital look, or non-digital methodology is best.
     
  22. lionelpina

    lionelpina Member

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Definitely worth the read.
     
  23. tiberiustibz

    tiberiustibz Member

    Messages:
    1,749
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Location:
    Tufts Univer
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Does anyone like sitting in front of photoshop for a few hours? It's not fun. Then again, seeing a new fiber print? Very fun.
     
  24. nsouto

    nsouto Subscriber

    Messages:
    506
    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Location:
    Sydney Austr
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Great article! And a great blog as well.

    I think it's not as much about film vs d*****l as it is about the "compressed" professional processes we have nowadays.

    The real problem is the notion that a one-man band can achieve the same results as a team of professional specialists while still exercising artistic integrity and quality.

    It just doesn't happen that way.

    Yeah, sure: one guy using all the latest electronic doo-dahs can now do at home what used to require a small army.

    So what? Who asked for that quantity of work? Isn't that guy now stressed out and over-worked? How can he produce best art/best value in those conditions?

    Goes for girls too, so don't ask me to write "person": it's implied.

    Where is it written that quality of the one-man band mass-production output will match the combined results and knowledge of the small army?

    Quantity is not a synonym to quality. Never was, never will be.

    Particularly when what is involved is art produced by one, as opposed to manufacturing and mass-production.

    Confusing the two is what the so-called "d*****l revolution" achieved.

    I think folks are starting to wake up to the reality of unrealistic schedules and over-worked, sub-standard results.

    We'll now see a phase of "return to the origins", before once again folks realize that the middle ground is where the virtue is. So to speak.
     
  25. Wolfeye

    Wolfeye Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,124
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    Iowa
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Ultimately, it doesn't matter what you think or do. You just have to be happy doing it. If you're not, try something different.

    Sadly, the truth of the matter is that digital's popularity has cheapened photography and it will probably never recover. In the film days there was more discontent, with mom and uncle Bob's P&S 110 or APS or whatever clearly unsatisfactory. So much so that seeing a great print made you want to hire that photographer. By comparison the digital shoot-and-erase until you get it right has resulted in far more acceptable photos being made by the masses. And that's all they want.
     
  26. HouTexDavid

    HouTexDavid Member

    Messages:
    22
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Very good read. I especially liked his analysis of the time spent in digital vs. film. I took up photography because I love to shoot pictures and see the results, not because I want to spend hours "bit-twiddling" digital images in front of a computer monitor.

    I think that it is also about the complexity of the cameras, as well. I'm an amateur, so I don't shoot every day or even every week. I can easily remember f/stop, shutter speed, and focus. What I can't remember are the 9,344 settings on my wife's Canon point and shoot digital. I suspect that 90% of the digi cameras sold are left on the "snapshot" settings, because many of the users don't understand light, depth-of-field, etc.

    Perhaps some people are getting a little fed up with our digital world. The computer deserves it's due (I've made a 35 year career in IT), but there is something very satisfying about fine mechanical Swiss watches, Leica (film) cameras, blued carbon steel and wood firearms, and "real" martinis (gin and vermouth)! Sorry, drifted off topic there... David