| The impact of technology on content. [message #735] |
Thu, 19 May 2005 20:16  |
 ZoneZero Forums
Messages: 141
Registered: March 2005 |
Senior Member |
|
|
|
Please share with us your opinions and ideas on this matter
|
|
|
| Re: The impact of technology on content. [message #736 is a reply to message #735 ] |
Tue, 24 May 2005 00:18  |
|
This passionate essay by Mr Meyer is not the sort of thing you would find in Popular Photography which is so driven by product descritpion and testing. But there was one common ground shared by both this essay and Popular Photography. This is an overemphasis on the magic of equipment with much less mention of the problem that both digital and film cameras have to share. This is the control of contrast. Little mention is made that with a $5000 digital camera in hand or with a $200 one little difference will be found if one uses the the built-in flash. No magic with PhotoShop will help save the situation. Cartier-Bresson's (with his Leica and b+w film) was able to capture wonderful street photograph in mostly (certainly not all) low contrast situations. Had Cartier-Bresson gone to Africa and forced to shoot with Ektachrome the results would have been far different. But then he would have waited for early morning or late evening light. While I will not assert that this applies to all cases I would suggest that the advent of digital cameras allied to PhotoShop is a formula for shoddy photographic practices.
I would also like to mention an interesting discovery in my class ( I teach the nude portrait and the class has both film camera and digital camera students). In a studio with no cove and using one softbox light the Polaroid showed that the background wall behind our model had gone to almost black. We lit this on purpose. But the LCD screens of the $3000 plus digital Nikons and Canons showed lots of detail in the back wall.
|
|
|
| Re: The impact of technology on content. [message #745 is a reply to message #735 ] |
Tue, 24 May 2005 02:57 |
|
What is interesting about the new technology that Mr. Meyer writes about is that this new technology still depends on that old 1,2,3. The lens, the box, the light recorder (be it film or a ccd). Here I show you one of my first direct plant scans from my garden of Rosa 'Reine Victoria'. My original scan at 100% (I want to use my plant scanning as a an accurate method of recording the plants of my garden) at 1200 dpi is about 50 megs. The level of detail from my cheap Epson 1640 SU is astounding. The new technology has not replaced my film cameras. It has given me more tools, more options and more to be inspired by. The trick is not to get lost on the "200 plus" satellite dish TV channel world we live in. Over-choice can kill inspiration.
[Updated on: Tue, 01 November 2005 15:34] by Moderator
|
|
|
| Re: The impact of technology on content. [message #1023 is a reply to message #736 ] |
Sun, 17 July 2005 14:26 |
Pedro Meyer
Messages: 202
Registered: March 2005 |
Senior Member |
|
|
I just want to comment Alex, that your constant participation with all the great examples of your work and ideas, are most welcome and contribute greatly to the ongoing debates during this transition to digital technology.
Keep up the good work, and your involvement, it is very inspiring,
Best regards
Pedro Meyer
Publisher of ZoneZero
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
FAQ
Register
Login
Home
) 1 Vote(s)
)