[Thomas]

Rick:

I looked at some of your FB images; some very nice images there. My experience has been that Facebook is not the place for fine photography; display is not good and depending on your audience, most viewers aren't that interested.

Tom

[Richard Longseth]

Rick:

I looked at some of your FB images; some very nice images there. My experience has been that Facebook is not the place for fine photography; display is not good and depending on your audience, most viewers aren't that interested.

Tom

Tom,

Thanks for looking and your compliments. I've been doing the FB thing for a relatively short time. I'm trying to post something every couple days or so. I have no audience. Its the same few people that see my stuff and do the likes and comments. Its funny. That last photo I posted - of the stars and lighthouse - which is with the K-1, has only two likes. I just joined a Door County Vacationers group and posted that same shot there. In less than a week it has 129 likes and a half page of comments. I didn't use a link back to my page because I didn't know if that would be allowed. Hopefully I can grow an audience of people actually interested in the type of photography I do. I also have a poorly neglected website which showcases the photos much better, but I have yet to finish that….still. Richard Longseth Photography

Rick

---------- Post added 07-14-16 at 11:38 PM ----------

Phil,
I reread your post. I should have mentioned that I also save everything as a flattened TIFF when I'm done in Photoshop. My workflow is to do adjustments to the RAW file in Lightroom. Then I go into Photoshop and nudge things layer after layer after layer. Many layers…..and then save as a Large Document Format .psb master. I flatten that and save as a TIFF. I also make a high quality jpg while I'm at it.
Rick

[PhilRich]

Richard,
You've got a lot of really good photos on your site. Thanks for the replies.

[Kolor-Pikker]

Wow Mike, huge difference.

When I had the K1, I found that the difference in landscape fine detail was quite significant between it and the 645z and also the top results were much easier to achieve with the 645 handheld over the K-1 handheld, enough so that I sold the K1. On tripod the K1 was closer but still not as good.

---------- Post added 07-14-16 at 06:54 PM ----------



That difference is not all just resolution either, there is a ton of detail rendered in the Z image that would be there even if it were say 40mp like the 645D. A much better image.

For years I've always wondered why most fashion photographers prefer to use medium format, wherever I'd look it was Phase or Hassy, and the Z really opened up the answer to that reason for me. I doubt it's just the pixel density or resolution at play here.

At the same time, as I've transitioned from APS-C to FF to crop-MF, I've noticed that the image quality gets progressively "smoother". Even with the higher resolving power, it seems like the image is less sharp when looking up close at details, until you do a comparison and get a reality check again.

[Richard Longseth]

Richard,
You've got a lot of really good photos on your site. Thanks for the replies.

Thanks Phil and thanks for looking. Nearly all the photos posted on FB and my website are with some sort of Pentax. 67,67II,645D, and now the K-1.