Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Really nice collection of pictures of cameras you have posted, Beachluvr. It's nice to know you have even used them all.

    You say that even now some magazines will not accept digital photgraphs. I've heard that before so I know your right about that, but I don't really understand why. I mean, the printers with which they print can't be that good that you actually see the difference in resolution of the photgraphs used? Or is there more than just a resolution difference between digital photographs and those made with film or 4 x 5 transparancies?
    Last edited by Prospero; 02-07-2006 at 12:10 PM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by Prospero
    Really nice collection of pictures of cameras you have posted, Beachluvr. It's nice to know you have even used them all.

    You say that even now some magazines will not accept digital photgraphs. I've heard that before so I know your right about that, but I don't really understand why. I mean, the printers with which they print it can't be that good that you actually see the difference in resolution of the photgraphs used? Or is there more than just a resolution difference between digital photographs and those made with film or 4 x 5 transparancies?
    When someone shows me the "really nice" picture they took with their entry-level DSLR (read sub-$1000) and printed on their "high dpi" inkjet printer I agree it looks "nice". When they start believing that qualifies them to be published in National Geographic, then we might have a slight problem.

    #1 of course, the talent and skill of the photographer is paramount. The equipment is almost meaningless when it comes to crafting a publishable photograph. For all the chatter in forums like this about words like noise, saturation, artifacts, etc. the reality is those specs are just a piece of the puzzle.

    To answer your question, yes there is a "resolution" difference between what most forum members are discussing as digital photographs and what a 4 x 5 transparency is capable of.

    I often direct such questions to Arizona Highways website where they do an excellent job of outlining their photographers' guidelines. Anyone remotely interested in getting their work published in fashion, decorating, travel and other such media should read photographers' guidelines carefully. It is a whole different world from news photography and/or personal photography. Yes there ARE some expensive digital tools used in such publications, but trust me they are not sub-$1000 DSLRs.

    I'm resisting going overboard on directing readers to Ken Rockwell's website, but darn it he has earned his credentials. His site is like a mad professor's laboratory ... tons of notes and references and topics ... but his discourse on the subject of digital resolution should be burned into the brains of any person interested in any digital camera, from the most basic toy to the ultimate machine made. You have to search around to find it, but if you have trouble he references it in his D70s and D200 articles.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Thanks for your extensive and interesting reply, Beachluvr. Of course, I realise that the skill of the photographer is limited, but I always thought that a 6 to 8 megapixel image would create a picture of such a high resolution that it would beat the resolution a printer is capeable of. I must have been confused with consumer printers and did not take into account noise, artifects, etc. Your explanations has cleared things up for me. I will visit the website of Ken Rockwell, I would love to learn more about photography in general and this subject in particular.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by Prospero
    Thanks for your extensive and interesting reply, Beachluvr. Of course, I realise that the skill of the photographer is limited, but I always thought that a 6 to 8 megapixel image would create a picture of such a high resolution that it would beat the resolution a printer is capeable of. I must have been confused with consumer printers and did not take into account noise, artifects, etc. Your explanations has cleared things up for me. I will visit the website of Ken Rockwell, I would love to learn more about photography in general and this subject in particular.
    Cool

    A favorite quote is "more megapixels can help make a bigger picture, not necessarily a better picture"

    Ken does a great job discussing the myth of megapixels.

    Getting confused by consumer inkjet printers is easy enough. The hype in that industry is amazing. The major manufacturers get away with quoting number of "dots" that are ridiculous. When you read their fine print you discover it's a marketing game. But that really has nothing to do with commercial printers, they don't print National Geographic on a consumer inkjet printer of course.

    I've sat through countless seminars and workshops on the mechanics of commercial printing. I know what they're telling me but the subject bores me. If I'm told my client needs my product to be delivered to meet their guidelines, I do what they say. When I try to fight it I'm not going to win anyway

    You've got a good mind, Prospero, keep it open and you can become a great photographer.
    Last edited by beachluvr; 02-07-2006 at 01:18 PM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    21
    This was my Mother's camera. She bought it when she was a teen, sometime in the mid 30's.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    181
    Wow! First prize for the oldest camera so far, and in remarkable condition. Thanks for sharing.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by beachluvr
    Wow! First prize for the oldest camera so far, and in remarkable condition. Thanks for sharing.
    You're right beachluvr, so far, Freedom1 definitly deserves the first price. I don't think anybody will come up with an older one.
    Don't have any price to give, unfortunatly .

    By the way, thanks a lot for the encouragement, Beachluvr.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Kharkiv, Ukraine
    Posts
    1,201
    Kharkiv, Ukraine. Fuji FinePix S9500. Nov, 27, 2005
    Every Sunday the photo market gathers.
    Here it is possible to find anything you like. I have bought here mechanical cable release only for $1!
    (Not each cameras has a socket for mechanical cable release )
    When will become warmer - I shall necessarily go shots unique photos things.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    The main lining in a computer - between the monitor and a chair
    My photo gallery in Flickr

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by Kushnirenko
    Kharkiv, Ukraine. Fuji FinePix S9500. Nov, 27, 2005
    Every Sunday the photo market gathers.
    Here it is possible to find anything you like. I have bought here mechanical cable release only for $1!
    (Not each cameras has a socket for mechanical cable release )
    When will become warmer - I shall necessarily go shots unique photos things.
    Kushnirenko I have been to such markets in your region and my house has some interesting collections I have found from the merchants. I would be out of control finding the classic old cameras and would want to buy them all. That picture tells a good story, thank you for posting it. I should be tempted to shop with you someday.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,498
    Now that's a camera! I'm not sure of the maker...maybe Goertz? Saw it on a table on Portabello Rd. in Notting Hill...had a pint across the street and when I came back, it was gone.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •