>
> Still, do you have to exaggerate so much? Why not stick to extolling
> those areas where the OMs and film have a real advantage?
>
Whoa, there Cowboy!
Moose, I very specifically did not talk about noise. Chuck brought that up
and he has a 5D just like you. The noise argument is long since over. The
fact is, ISO 400 from my E-1 at "normal" exposures isn't any noisier than a
scan on Provia 100F on my Nikon Coolscan V-ED. If a crappy camera like the
E-1 can best a fine-grained slide-film, then I'd suggest that film is
history in this topic. I'm not going there. How you read into my essay that
film was superior to digital in this discussion is beyond me. I'd prefer
that you not automatically read into everything I write an anti-digital and
anti-canon bias. I don't mean to be snippy, but I think you are off base and
out-of-line.
Secondly, to your specific point, yes, I did extol those areas where I felt
that the OMs and film have a real advantage:
1. OTF based auto-exposure. As the light was rapidly changing DURING the
long exposure (of the dozen images I took, not two were the same), a
viewfinder-based auto-exposure system would not have given the same
exposure. Better or worse, I do not know, but it would have been
different--especially if the metering was more center-weighted. OTF has its
flaws, but in my 23.5 years of experience with the OM system I've learned
that for longer exposures the system not only works, but works extremely
well. I definitely could not get a usable meter reading from the sky using
my handheld meter.
2. I identified two flaws in film and discussed them at length. Reciprocity
failure and color shifting. Normally these are flaws, flaws which digital
isn't so challenged with. I said repeatably how the film saw colors which
the human eye did not. What I did was exploit these two flaws to my
advantage. The color shift intensified the reds which I was counting on.
Fortunately Provia 100F has little reciprocity failure under two minutes,
but Velvia 100 isn't so blessed and the intensification is of different
colors.
3. I acknowledged the non-linearity of film and the self-attenuation
characteristic that some films have. Again, as compared to digital this is
typically a flaw, but in this specific type of transluminance subject,
digital does not handle high color saturation at high value and extreme
contrasts as well. I described in great detail exactly what the score was
there and the gamma battle we all fight. Velvia 100 failed this time, where
Provia gave far superior results.
4. I mentioned the use of digital and the result it gave. The E-1 might suck
when it comes to sensor noise, but I'll put it up against your 5D in color
fidelity and practical dynamic range. The latest/greatest have been making
improvements in this are, but only incrementally. A digital camera would
have given different results--most likely requiring HDR to get anywhere
close to the narrow contrast range needed for the sky.
5. Implied, but not mentioned--I accomplished this photograph with a $5 roll
of film and $5 of processing. $10 and all total, there were about 12 shots,
so 1/3 the cost or about $3.33. As I don't usually shoot this kind of
subject and my low-end E-1 handles all my normal paying work, I can't
justify the cost of even a used 5D right now, much less a new one or a D700
which has substandard pixel-count.
I never once mentioned the advantage or disadvantage of film/sensor speed in
making this photo. I shot some 2-3 minute exposures this trip specifically
for the look that a long exposure gives me. Had I used a 5D Mk2, I'm sure I
could have shot it in 8 seconds or less, but the look would not have been
what I was seeking. I wouldn't mind having ISO 6400 performance that looks
like Velvia 50, but that isn't always the goal. It is a nice option, though.
I'm sure any photographer worth his/her salt could have created a decent
photograph with whatever imaging system at his/her disposal. But let's be
honest with ourselves--how many of us go out to photograph a post-sunset sky
when it is nearly dark? ISO 100, F2.8 and 2 minutes. Do the math.
Moose, I'm not sure what your issue is, but this time I actually met and
exceeded your request. If you think I'm exaggerating, as you claim, prove
it.
AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|