Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,573   Posts: 1,545,682   Online: 821
      
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48
  1. #1
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,367
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435

    What a disappointment....

    http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/depart...raphy&GT1=8538

    I just read this article about Franz Lanting, the wildlife photographer. He´s gone digital, and is proselytizing for the d-word. And of course, the media are eating it up. Although I like his work for what it is, there are other nature photographers out there still shooting film, and frankly I like their work better. I´m kicking myself for forgetting their names, but there are these two photographers who shoot almost exclusively with Hasselblads, except for their underwater work, which is done with a Nikonos. I saw them present their work at a discussion at the National Academy of Sciences about two years ago. They had a pair of the Hasselblad projectors, and projected original transparencies ten feet high. WOW. They specialize in "portraits" of endangered wildlife.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,599
    Images
    116
    For the kind of work he does I don't blame him. If you're a 35mm color shooter it's hard to get past the conveniences of digital and the qualitative differences between a top DSLR and 35mm color film are negliable at this point. I adore film and that's what I have chosen to use for my own work because it suits me best. If someday digital can give me better results I'll switch in a second. I don't drink the kool aid for any technology and if Franz has decided to switch to digital I'm sure he's given it a great deal of thought and was not done lightly.

  3. #3
    Bromo33333's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    669

    Negligable? :confused:

    Quote Originally Posted by Early Riser
    If you're a 35mm color shooter it's hard to get past the conveniences of digital and the qualitative differences between a top DSLR and 35mm color film are negliable at this point. ... I don't drink the kool aid for any technology and if Franz has decided to switch to digital I'm sure he's given it a great deal of thought and was not done lightly.
    I think "negligible" is a pretty subjective term. While I think it is posisble to get satisfying results with digital, and I do think that 35mm as a professional medium is already a niche market - but a "negligable" difference depends upon what one thinks is important and not important. If you absolutley HATE grain, then digital will be superior for larger magnifications - though at extremes where film will look grainy, digital will look pixelly or smeary. (though if you scan film, the differences at extremes will be less) If you love subtlety of shadows and highlights in your pictures then digital is not quite there at any resolution (and will probably take a decade to sort it out).

    (More importantly if you need a picture minutes after you take it to e-mail to your editor - digital is your thing - no question)

    Reminds me of the CD vs. LP debates in the 1980's. The initial debate was about CD's strengths - no pops scratches and other surface noise - and the slogan "perfect sound forever". It didn't focus much on how a violin/piano or voice sounded (pretty nasty - It took digital technology about 10-15 years to sort that out, and some would say they haven't yet equalled LP or reel-to-reel). The convenience of CD won out - and eventually the sound became acceptable. Though there is a HUGE resurgence of LP right now in the over 40's, and the under 25 set.
    B & D
    Rochester, NY
    ========================
    Quiquid Latine dictum sit altum viditur

  4. #4
    Alex Hawley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kansas, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,895
    Images
    63
    'Tis a shame and a loss to the film community. Lanting is perhaps the most eminent wildlife photographer in the world. His honors are many and include Knighthood. Well deserved IMO. Anyone who will slide into a pirahna and snake infested pond to get a shot of a bug is most worthy.

    Given his stature, his equipment endorsements should be quite lucrative.
    Semper Fi & God Bless America
    My Photography Blog

  5. #5
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,029
    Could it be because of the manipulation available with photoshop.

    Most wildlife stuff I see these days has been manipulated to increase and decrease contrast/exposure and add, enhance and remove elements.


    Michael
    I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.

  6. #6
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Early Riser
    For the kind of work he does I don't blame him. If you're a 35mm color shooter it's hard to get past the conveniences of digital and the qualitative differences between a top DSLR and 35mm color film are negliable at this point.
    I too have to disagree with you; "negligible" is a subjective term. I still see a lot of difference between the two mediums, which is why I still shoot Velvia in my F5 over a newer DSLR. However, for Franz Lantings work, I'm not surprised. Most of his work isn't particulary sharp, most are handheld, and he does do a lot of work for National Geographic which is mostly a digital publication these days. FWIW, I believe that Thomas Mangelsen still shoots only film - probably one of the last of the wildlife photographers that still does.
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  7. #7
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,290
    Images
    20
    It is a loss, but I can see how it makes sense for him.

    Most of his income, I suspect, comes from publication rather than fine prints, the prints he sells are inkjets or LightJets, and most of his work is 35mm, so it's not as if he's giving up medium format for small format digital. Wildlife photography is pretty film intensive, and he has the kind of operation to use any sort of infrastructure he needs. If he can go into the rainforest with a crew of assistants and equipment to build a scaffold for photographing in the canopy for days or weeks at a time, it's not such a big deal to carry all the batteries and laptops necessary to shoot high-end digital in remote locations.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  8. #8
    Alex Hawley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kansas, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,895
    Images
    63
    The logistics of getting film into and out of remote locations is the prime driving force behind wildlife photogs going digital, from what I can gather. It may take weeks to get film on and off location. With digital, the photograher can review the days work and determine whether the results are satisfactory or not right on location. This is impossible using film which must be shipped to a processing lab then shipped back to the photographer, imposing a very lengthy time delay.

    Then there is the print format as David aptly points out.
    Semper Fi & God Bless America
    My Photography Blog

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,599
    Images
    116
    I shoot film, but I've also worked digitally on a professional basis since 1991 so I have a little experience with both. I prefer to work with film as it suits what I do best. I used the term "negligible" to describe the differences between a high end DSLR and 35mm film, because it's pretty much a toss up when it comes to quality. It is a subjective matter, pixels versus grain, and which bothers you more. To me that is not a clear cut victory for either technology and that is why I used the term negligible.

    It's pretty obvious that Franz, we've been represented by some of the same galleries and I've met him, has chosen what he feels gives him the best results. I'm sure there are going to be snipes about his choice, but let's be really clear about this, the guy has probably shot more 35mm film out doors and in varied conditions than anyone here. You do not make a major change mid career from film to digital without giving it serious thought, so please just cut the guy a break.
    Last edited by Early Riser; 09-11-2006 at 05:12 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  10. #10
    Curt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,551
    Images
    15
    I went to the state fair yesterday with my son and at the "Old Time" photo boot was an old Kodak 2D 8x10 camera with an old ratty bellows with holes hanging like the gut of someone who thinks that al-Qaeda is 1/10 the stated number and is over played in the media and upon closer inspectin found that a digital camera had been fitted behind the lens board. I took a look at the back and saw a moving picture on the ground glass. The old time photo, dress up, is done with digital and a printer. Only one ink needed; brown. I can't blame them but what a sad death for a fine camera.

    Curt

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin