Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] (OM) OT - sort of - apparent discernable resolution, on screen

Subject: Re: [OM] (OM) OT - sort of - apparent discernable resolution, on screen
From: Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 10:23:32 -0500
Brian, don't feel bad. I am substantially in disagreement with His
Moosiness on this one as well. Not totally so, but he went a direction
in his last philippic that I feel compelled to objurgate.

Moose implied that the reason why your images aren't as good as those
Phase One images has to do with your computer, software and editing
methods. Well, one out of five ain't too bad. He is correct in the
following aspects.

A computer system is comprised of five componants: Hardware, Software,
Data, Procedures and People.

A digital imaging system is comprised of five componants: Hardware,
Software, Data, Procedures and People.

Starting with the hardware, this guy's cameras and lenses are
essentially the best available today. Theoretically, the hardware
shouldn't be the least limiting available. From a computer
perspective, I'm sure he has the latest/greatest Apple to handle those
immense image files in a speedy manner.

Software. I'll assume that he uses the latest/greatest Capture One
software as well as the best that Adobe Photoshop has to offer. The
question here is do these software packages offer ANYTHING specific
that is directly related to image quality that isn't available through
other, low-cost solutions? Essentially, no. They ONLY offer an
improvement in workflow or editing methods. If you know and understand
what is going on with any process, you can duplicate that process with
any number of low-cost software solutions.

Data. This would be the source image itself. The scene. The subject.
Lighting, composition, etc. If you start out with a piece of liver,
you can only make liver and onions. Liver can never become filet
mignon.

People. The guy has exceptional skills not only for the moment of
capture, but in knowing how to wring out every last drop from the
image. Money can't buy this. Either a person knows how to do all this
or he doesn't. Some stuff can be taught, but teaching only goes so
far. At some point, the individual steps up and becomes far more than
the teacher.

Finally, (with a slight reversal of the last points), Procedures.  If
you control the variables of lighting, wind, vibration, focus and
exposure, you have a far greater chance of getting a better image in
the end than with a "snapshot" taken with the arms stuck out in front
of you holding a camera like it's a stinky diaper. That, of course is
easy to see on the "production side", but less so on the
"post-production side". It's the procedures which define the vast
majority of quality issues in the final presented image. No amount of
the other four components matter a bit if the procedures are not up to
standards. Fortunately, "procedures" is the great leveler in the
equation. You can do a lot if you know what to do.

One thing that I do pride myself on is being able to minimize the
necessity of costly investments in hardware and software. To a certain
extent, this works out fine. Granted, I cannot make bed-spread sized
prints with 300ppi resolution, but for the majority of my uses, the
hardware and software are sufficient. This means that I have to make
up for it in the other areas when the technology is being pushed to
the edge.

The sample photographs in question represent a perfect storm of all
five aspects. However, the downsize eliminates most of the benefits of
the hardware.

AG
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
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