[tromboads]

Despite this being a glorious tribute thread to the K10d, I'm curious as to why you are so against manipulating photos?

Someone previously mentined that you are really limiting what can be achieved with this medium. Whether you like it or note is totally a matter of personal tatse, but it seems a little shortsighted to completely disregard it?

I mean, It's not as if manipulation in photography was invented with the digital camera.

Surely the ultimate outcome of a medium of visual communication is in the communicating. And if one communicates as much, or something more clearly with a cloned out sky so be it?

[rayallen]

And back in the days of C41 colour film when you dropped off your film at the 1 hour lab....did you really think that the prints you got back were straight out of the camera? Those film processors were quite smart and used to adjust the exposure to produce a better print where necessary. And quite often the operator would intervene as well.

Slides were a different matter; if you made a mistake in-camera then it was very obvious.

[Dartmoor Dave]

Well, TaoMaas has quoted me completely out of context, so I'm just going to re-post what I originally said:

And of course there’s no such thing as an unprocessed digital photograph anyway. A jpeg straight from the camera has still been converted from the raw data, but the conversion has been done automatically, according to parameters set by the camera’s firmware designers and the user’s menu choices.

Converting from raw to jpeg at home on the computer is merely a different way of doing the same thing. In fact I’d argue that, when I shoot raw+ and compare my own conversion with the jpeg straight from the camera, my own version is usually LESS processed. I prefer to get it right in camera and only apply very simple levels and sharpening adjustments on the computer, but that’s because I shot Kodachrome for thirty years before I went digital. I learned my photography in an era when I had no way of doing any post processing at all. Because I was always hopeless in the darkroom, and never managed to produce a B&W wet print worth seeing the light of day.

Personally, I feel that colour photographs can only withstand a very limited amount of processing before they start to look fake. Whereas I think that B&W can take extensive manipulation and still look wonderful. But that’s just my personal aesthetic taste, and it’s no more valid than anyone else’s.

If I think that a photograph looks beautiful, and I believe that it’s a genuine attempt by the photographer to convey what it felt like to be there in the moment, then I couldn’t care less what technical means were used to achieve the end result.

I agree with Tromboads: couldn't we just preserve the K10D Club as a place for people to share their results with this wonderful camera?

[Digitalis]

I'm curious as to why you are so against manipulating photos?

One word: verisimilitude.

---

Last edited by Digitalis; 08-04-2014 at 06:39 AM.

[paulh]

I agree with Tromboads: couldn't we just preserve the K10D Club as a place for people to share their results with this wonderful camera?

Yes.

With the 18-55 kit lens:

[tromboads]

---------- Post added 08-04-14 at 11:26 PM ----------

One word: verissamilitude.

Lets see the K10 take a photo of that

[Dartmoor Dave]

Here are a couple of my first shots after returning to the digital age earlier this year, having used film exclusively over the winter. I've now decided that the glorious CCD sensor in my K10D clone GX10 gives me everything I need.

With the Super Takumar 20mm



Since there's been so much talk about processing recently, here is what a completely unprocessed rendering of the raw data looks like, generated by Rawdigger.



This one is a 7 shot panorama, with the Super Takumar 20mm again.

[rayallen]

Central Coast Photography Club had a macro meet today (7Aug 2014) in a nearby national park.

Here is my favourite from the day taken with the K10D and a Macro-Takumar 50mm f4 (circa 1964-1966). The flower is a hardenbergia (or so I have been reliably informed).

[Oldhand]

Central Coast Photography Club had a macro meet today (7Aug 2014) in a nearby national park.

Here is my favourite from the day taken with the K10D and a Macro-Takumar 50mm f4 (circa 1964-1966). The flower is a hardenbergia (or so I have been reliably informed).

Oh yeah!
What a great combination Ray.
Awesome.
I feel privileged to be the owner of a K-10D.
That camera sings sometimes.
OH

[Oldhand]

The King Parrots visited again today.
This is the female - not as colourful but what definition from the lovely K-10D.
The lens was an old Soligor 4.5/250 taken wide open.
I will have to move that cuttlefish - it is ruining my pictures.
OH

[rayallen]

The King Parrots visited again today.
This is the female - not as colourful but what definition from the lovely K-10D.
The lens was an old Soligor 4.5/250 taken wide open.
I will have to move that cuttlefish - it is ruining my pictures.
OH

Beautiful rendition of those fine feathers. And very nice bokeh at max aperture.
Yes, that cuttlefish will have to go.

---------- Post added 08-07-2014 at 07:33 PM ----------

Oh yeah!
What a great combination Ray.
Awesome.
I feel privileged to be the owner of a K-10D.
That camera sings sometimes.
OH

Thank you for your kind words, Tom. Yes, images like this make me glad I have a K10D.

[RussV]

High quality pictures on here in the last day or two.

[Oldhand]

Front yard this morning.
OH

[rayallen]

Front yard this morning.
OH

Very sharp and looks good with the dark b/g. Another great image, Tom.
I have a Komura f2.5 105mm preset which I very rarely use. Maybe I should give it a go on the K10D. I have always thought that f2.5 was a strange max aperture.

[Oldhand]

Very sharp and looks good with the dark b/g. Another great image, Tom.
I have a Komura f2.5 105mm preset which I very rarely use. Maybe I should give it a go on the K10D. I have always thought that f2.5 was a strange max aperture.

I think that your lens is quite rare Ray.
I would be interested to see some images from it. I expect it will be excellent.
OH