Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] ( OM ) Digital landscapes - example

Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) Digital landscapes - example
From: "Brian Swale" <bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:09:06 +1200
Cc: bwhitmire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mainly to Bob Whitmire; but "Hi" to all,

Bob, I wasn't ignoring your e-mail, I was considering how to reply.

The global time differences don't help; I went to bed at 2am having spent 
more than 2 hours reading all the responses in the digest, and assimilating 
what I had been told by everybody, then composing a reply; but you would 
perhaps not have realised the hours I kept; nor that I have not long ago 
been woken up at 8am by the phone call from a stranger. Not enough sleep.

The Digest arrives in my computer usually some time after 10.30 pm.

I could not find any of Caponigro's Antarctica images on his site for me to 
make an opinion of my own. And having not seen them I was also unaware 
also that they had not been altered digitally. Yes, I know how well prints can 
look. I visited the travelling Ansel Adams exhibition just a few years ago (but 
I think the prints of the same images published in the corresponding book, 
which I have, are better), and I went to a local gallery 10 weeks ago to look 
at the exhibition of large mounted prints by Andris Apse.

Perhaps it would have been more accurate for me to have written that I am 
quite disappointed in what I have managed to create with the digital 
Olympus gear I bought in the expectation of a certain standard of 
excellence. I first really noticed problems, with the blown-out rendering of 
well-lit autumn leaves, just a couple of months back, and I began looking 
more closely after that.  

It is clear I'm not all that good at using the gear either; I bought the E-3 
(when it became available at a huge discount) in a fit of extreme annoyance 
with the E-510 I had bought not all that long before, because in an instant  
during a shooting session one afternoon the settings altered to produce 
images so dark that they were (and are) useless. I was unaware of this at 
the time and didn't realise something had happened until well away from the 
scene and opportunity. I'm still not sure what happened except I am 
suspicious of the buttons on the back that sit where my thumb also does, all 
too often.

I don't plan to continue the thread in the Olympus group though I will 
probably ask people for guidance on procedures I am ignorant of; such as 
CH Ling pointing out that with RAW file editors it is possible to change the 
white balance. I think I have taken more than enough of the group attention 
for a while.    However, on the other hand, I found it very useful to get 
alternative "take" on the topic by very capable photographers such as Ken 
Norton to name one, as well.

Thanks for your letters.

Brian

Date sent:              Tue, 4 Aug 2009 17:07:10 -0400
From:                   <bwhitmire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:                     Olympus Camera Discussion 
<olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:                Re: [OM] ( OM ) Digital landscapes - example
Copies to:              Brian Swale <bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> Well, I'm bowing out of this discussion 'cause there's nothing more
> I have to say, except that Brian, you completely missed my point.
> You said digital doesn't cut the mustard for landscapes. I said I
> had been to Caponigro's gallery and seen the prints of his trip.
> Paper: Epson Ultra Smooth Fine Art. Printer: Epson 9900. Camera:
> Canon 5D Mk II. He made a point that the images were not altered.
> They are, he said, "editorial" images. Yes, he's known for altered
> landscapes. But my points were that the landscapes I saw were not
> altered, that they were digital, and that they more than cut the
> mustard.
> 
> The idea is to do what makes you happy. Shoot with what fulfills
> you. But whatch those all-encompassing sweeping statements. I know,
> 'cause I make enough of them myself. <g>
> 
> --Bob
> 
> 
> ---- Brian Swale <bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
> <snip> 
> > 
> > Bob Whitmire drew my attention to JP Caponigro's site ( 
> > http://www.johnpaulcaponigro.com/index.php  ) and his Antarctic
> photos 
> > which are all digital. On his site he says he uses Canon 5Ds Mark
> II, 
> > Canon 1Ds Mark II, Canon 1Ds, Canon 28-135 IS lens, Canon 100-400
> IS 
> > lens, and Canon 2X extender.
> > 
> > I found very few of his Antarctic shots, but I noticed that many
> of the shots 
> > he exhibits on his site are greatly modified using Photoshop, and
> he 
> > employs staff to do this. Much of his work in my opinion would
> best be 
> > described as photo art ( of very talented quality, I hasten to
> add).<snip>

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz