Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-28-2018, 08:57 AM   #31
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 206
Fascinating discussion of different crop philosophies. To me, the native aspect ratio doesn't matter too much, because I generally crop to the demands of the image. For me to not have to crop would mean the camera would need an infinitely variable aspect ratio. I am sceptical of the idea that a standard frame or monitor size should dictate the composition of an image. That said, I still respect the craftsman who can compose within the limitations of the camera aspect ratio.

05-28-2018, 09:00 AM   #32
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RGlasel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Saskatoon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,202
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I shoot a lot of landscapes and prefer a 3:2 ratio versus 4:3 for those sorts of shot.
That's a good example of how the format fits the type of photograph. When we look at our surroundings, we scan from side to side, not up and down. When we look at a person, we look up and down and don't pay attention to the surroundings. 16:9 is very close to the aesthetically pleasing golden ratio but didn't become the norm until LCD panels replaced CRT computer displays. To keep the movie theatre experience different from watching movies at home, a 21:9 aspect ratio became common. It all depends on the environment where the images are being viewed, how close the viewer is to the medium, the subject matter and practical considerations for producing the display medium. A very smart Canadian once said "the medium is the message."
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It can be functionally equivalent, there are things both do better than the other, but my guess is the majority of the images viewed on a normal monitor won't be that much different if you shoot a series of images using different parameters.
The same could be said of smartphone photographs, but the experience of taking pictures with different formats is different and has an impact on the type of pictures we take with different camera formats. You don't pull a 645 format camera out of your jeans or bra to start taking casual shots of people close to you. The difference between APS-C and FF is minuscule because the experience of holding either format of camera and taking pictures is so similar. Differences in noise and resolution are insignificant between m43 and FF, yet given the opportunity to use either format for a particular situation, people will have a definite preference.
06-19-2018, 08:39 AM - 1 Like   #33
Pentaxian
Cipher's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 397
Original Poster
An update concerning functional equivalence: Ming's latest article (about using SOOC jpegs) features an image of an Olympus Pen F as its header. Click through it to see what kind of camera he used to take the picture.
06-19-2018, 09:08 AM - 3 Likes   #34
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,783
QuoteOriginally posted by Cipher Quote
An update concerning functional equivalence: Ming's latest article (about using SOOC jpegs) features an image of an Olympus Pen F as its header. Click through it to see what kind of camera he used to take the picture.
I read the article. I agree with him that out of camera jpegs have gotten pretty decent. The thing is that all of his images in the article could probably have been shot with the jpeg engine of a K10 too. They are images that are black and white and do not have high dynamic range.

The whole issue I have with the RAW versus jpeg debate (which probably has little to do with this thread) is that if I am going to do anything to my image -- a slight crop or bump the shadows at all -- then I am better off shooting RAW. With Lightroom it takes minimal time to do adjustments on images -- it takes me more time to cull my images than to post process them.

The reasons given to shoot jpeg are (1) saving memory (not a big deal any more -- memory is cheap) (2) jpeg is good enough (it is until it isn't) (3) pros get it right in camera (most pros I know shoot RAW) and (4) it saves time (this is less significant than it seems, as I said above, it takes me more time to delete mediocre photos than to process them).

Truthfully, there isn't a right way or a wrong way. If straight of camera jpegs work for you that's fine. Just for me, I get better results with RAW.



06-19-2018, 09:08 AM   #35
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,481
QuoteOriginally posted by Cipher Quote
An update concerning functional equivalence: Ming's latest article (about using SOOC jpegs) features an image of an Olympus Pen F as its header. Click through it to see what kind of camera he used to take the picture.
Basicly all you need to be a photographer. .....i'm for a new model at the end of the year and the camera inside is for me important and will be deciding wich smartphone to take.
06-19-2018, 09:26 AM   #36
Resident fiddler
Loyal Site Supporter
LensBeginner's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,525
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I read the article. I agree with him that out of camera jpegs have gotten pretty decent. The thing is that all of his images in the article could probably have been shot with the jpeg engine of a K10 too. They are images that are black and white and do not have high dynamic range.

The whole issue I have with the RAW versus jpeg debate (which probably has little to do with this thread) is that if I am going to do anything to my image -- a slight crop or bump the shadows at all -- then I am better off shooting RAW. With Lightroom it takes minimal time to do adjustments on images -- it takes me more time to cull my images than to post process them.

The reasons given to shoot jpeg are (1) saving memory (not a big deal any more -- memory is cheap) (2) jpeg is good enough (it is until it isn't) (3) pros get it right in camera (most pros I know shoot RAW) and (4) it saves time (this is less significant than it seems, as I said above, it takes me more time to delete mediocre photos than to process them).

Truthfully, there isn't a right way or a wrong way. If straight of camera jpegs work for you that's fine. Just for me, I get better results with RAW.
I can find at least two other good reason to shoot RAW - that by the way don't detract in any way from JPEG.

One is when you don't trust neither the camera LCD screen nor that silly low-res histogram. I wouldn't know if my image is too dark, too saturated etc. on a cr*ppy screen like that, and the histogram is ridiculously low-res, so it's a pain to judge.

The other is when you don't have time while shooting, and can't be bothered to set shadow recovery, highlight recovery, sharpness, saturation, etc. and fine-tune the JPEG image.
It happens a lot to me, when I have like 2-3 hours free to see a town I've never been to: I just need to set ISO-aperture-shutter speed, and I can do everything else at home, when I have time.

It's enough to be able to clip on the right exactly what isn't necessary (you can't save every specular highlight and every lamp post's light bulb - and you don't want to) - and even that is a pain without a RAW histogram available.
06-19-2018, 09:46 AM   #37
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 12,493
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Basicly all you need to be a photographer. .....i'm for a new model at the end of the year and the camera inside is for me important and will be deciding wich smartphone to take.
Even an old Olympus Trip 35 might be all you need to be a photographer. As always, it's a case of how much creative control the photographer wants, and whether that can be satisfied by the lens(es), sensor (or film) format and camera performance.

Phone cameras have advanced incredibly, and I'm amazed at what they're capable of - yet still acutely aware of the limitations, despite all of the advances in recent years. If the limitations fit with your use case and your creative control requirements, you're in business

Last edited by BigMackCam; 06-19-2018 at 09:56 AM.
06-19-2018, 10:02 AM   #38
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,481
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Even an old Olympus Trip 35 might be all you need to be a photographer. As always, it's a case of how much creative control the photographer wants, and whether that can be satisfied by the lens(es), sensor (or film) format and camera performance.

Phone cameras have advanced incredibly, and I'm amazed at what they're capable of - yet still acutely aware of the limitations, despite all of the advances in recent years. If the limitations fit with your use case and your creative control requirements, you're in business
Just yesterday Tim Cook was in Amsterdam. Networking probably, since in The Netherlands there are 167.000 jobs related to app-development for iPhone. In the boot there is also the women that is a professional iPhone photographer.

06-19-2018, 10:05 AM   #39
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,481
The link to Tim Cook

Tim Cook bezoekt Amsterdam: 'Fijn om terug te zijn!' - iCreate Magazine
06-19-2018, 10:09 AM   #40
Pentaxian
Cipher's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 397
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I read the article. I agree with him that out of camera jpegs have gotten pretty decent. The thing is that all of his images in the article could probably have been shot with the jpeg engine of a K10 too. They are images that are black and white and do not have high dynamic range.
I was referring to the color image, not the black and white ones, and the camera used to take it. I found that the camera Ming, who is a Hasselblad consultant, used for this particular shot was very interesting in light of the topic of this thread.
06-19-2018, 10:18 AM - 1 Like   #41
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,783
QuoteOriginally posted by Cipher Quote
I was referring to the color image, not the black and white ones, and the camera used to take it. I found that the camera Ming, who is a Hasselblad consultant, used for this particular shot was very interesting in light of the topic of this thread.
It still isn't a photo that has high dynamic range, difficult colors to reproduce or particularly shallow depth of field. To me, it is a snapshot and for snap shots, just about any current camera's jepg engine will have no trouble. My iphone 6 does fine in decent light and its smaller than any of the other cameras mentioned. Clearly for many people phone cameras are good enough.
06-19-2018, 10:35 AM   #42
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 12,493
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Just yesterday Tim Cook was in Amsterdam. Networking probably, since in The Netherlands there are 167.000 jobs related to app-development for iPhone. In the boot there is also the women that is a professional iPhone photographer.
I've seen some of Annet de Graaf's work before. She's excellent, and proof that you don't need a bag full of gear for certain types of photography. That said, I don't believe she does much "birds in flight" or long exposure astro work Clearly, the iPhone fits her requirements well.

Numerous professional photographers have limited themselves to one camera and/or lens over the years. The obvious advantage to the approach is that you become so familiar with the field of view, optical characteristics and camera operation that you don't need to consciously think about those things. You can just concentrate on the subject, composition and lighting.

In the latter part of her career, Jane Bown used an Olympus OM-1 and primarily (though not always) shot with an 85mm lens, usually at the same f/2.8 aperture and with a shutter speed around 1/60s. It worked for her

Last edited by BigMackCam; 06-19-2018 at 10:41 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
equivalence, format, ming, ming thein, photography, thein on format
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ming Thein - new Chief of Strategy for Hasselblad. interested_observer Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 25 03-31-2017 04:58 AM
Ming Thein: The ultimate lens list interested_observer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 11-19-2016 05:29 AM
How to design mirrorless right by Ming Thein interested_observer General Photography 5 11-04-2015 04:35 PM
Sony A7RII - The Good, Bad & Ugly - Ming Thein interested_observer Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 25 08-28-2015 07:48 AM
Ming Thein and the 645Z Adam G Pentax Medium Format 4 05-13-2014 02:20 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:17 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top