What type of photographer are you?

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

04/21/2003 12:37:49 AM · #1

I saw this on another forum, couldn't help myself laughing :)

What type of Photographer are you?

FYI this guy shoots Nikon, Canon, film and digital and medium format, but he's dogging professionals pretty good here.

Message edited by author 2003-04-21 01:00:56.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

04/21/2003 01:17:04 AM · #2

I don't know...it's labeled as a satire, but it seems like a perfectly straightforward, accurate description to me, except maybe that crack at the end about never joining a site with numerical scoring...thanks!

04/21/2003 01:19:10 AM · #3

Very funny :)

<<(You should join photography clubs, but never camera clubs or any clubs that try to score art, since art is entirely subjective and cannot be scored numerically.)>>

!!!

04/21/2003 01:28:16 AM · #4

Heh, i dind't even read that part :)

Originally posted by Journey:

Very funny :)

<<(You should join photography clubs, but never camera clubs or any clubs that try to score art, since art is entirely subjective and cannot be scored numerically.)>>

!!!

04/21/2003 01:39:26 AM · #5

It's almost near the end; in the section on Measurbators.

shadow

Sony DSC-W1

04/21/2003 03:38:13 AM · #6

LOL, interesting read. I guess that describes most of us here. The part a out joining groups that give numbers to photos, well, funny! Anyway, I'm more of a point-and-shoot type, taking photography as a casual activity. But with DPChallenge, I get comments on my shots, and that helps me improve in some way. Thanks y'all.

04/21/2003 01:14:32 PM · #7

It's a satire -- the guy doesn't respect Professional photographers much as he puts it down a 3..... His "How to make great photograph" in his links is very well written :)

Originally posted by shadow:

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

04/21/2003 01:17:00 PM · #8

My goal is level 1 LOL :-)

04/22/2003 12:14:48 AM · #9

That's interesting:
at the end of Rockwell's article he links to one forum that he considers not a waste of artistic time. So i went there and it was at photonet discussing .... Rockwell's article. One Alex Shishin (a photography critic???) said about Rockwell's own photography: he's technically very good, but he plays it "safe" and his photographs are predictable; they lack "soul".

So i visited several of Rockwell's galleries and looked at maybe 10 pictures (France, New Mexico, and one other one) and got tired of it. Yeah, the guy definitely has technique down pad but you do discern the formula. Got rapidly tired that all the pictures i saw had intense, highly saturated colors. Not a single one made my heart jump or moved me deeply or allowed me to emotionally connect with them. I guess they do lack soul. By his own definitions then Rockwell is a whore!

What do you think of his pictures?

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

04/22/2003 12:34:51 AM · #10

Beautiful nature, terrible photos!

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

04/22/2003 12:43:59 AM · #11

His images are quite good in the sense that he waits for the right time, the right light, and captures it well.

The reason why it's saturated a lot is beacuse he uses Velvia film (ISO 50) which is arguably the best slide films for outdoors, which Fuji has taken the crown of slide films from Kodak and Kodak is still trying to play catchup, even today.

I wouldn't say it lacked soul though. Some of them are really interesting. Some aren't.

I think people get used to seeing "digital camera produced images", which are not the same as film. I like film colors a lot, but digital cameras came nowhere near film. Even Adobe RGB is still not as vivid as film can capture. His after dark images are just gorgeous, IMHO, the slow exposure types.

Originally posted by Journey:

Ricky Cleave

Canon EOS-450D Rebel XSi

04/22/2003 02:00:48 AM · #12

I want to be a whore

04/22/2003 11:35:14 AM · #13

Ricky, we would all like to be whores if we could :)

Paganini, it isn't so much that my eyes are color polluted. I had just been looking at a photog book and pretty much all pics shot with Fuji Velvia. Great colors. With Rockwell i find them overall just a little too intense. There are some very nice pictures though. It's all a matter of personal taste.

04/22/2003 11:39:26 AM · #14

I just wish my 10D can produce Velvia like effects without having to go through a ton of photoshop stuff :)

In general digicams are still clipping too much on the highlights.
With slide film, you can overexpose and still recover the image. It's too much of a S curve and not enough dynamic range on the upper end for digicams.

Originally posted by Journey:

04/22/2003 12:00:59 PM · #15

my 10D does produce velvia-like effects without going through a ton of pshop.

it's all about - a) settings and b) exposure control.

04/22/2003 12:04:10 PM · #16

No it does not. If you have seen velvia film you will know what I mean.
Just because it's saturated to hell doesn't mean it's velvia :)

Originally posted by magnetic9999:

my 10D does produce velvia-like effects without going through a ton of pshop.

it's all about - a) settings and b) exposure control.

04/22/2003 12:04:41 PM · #17

gee, pag. i guess i've never seen velvia film since you said so ;)

04/22/2003 12:07:47 PM · #18

Don't know if you have seen it or rather, USE it. It's not the same. You can turn on saturation, adjust exposure and won't get het same results.

Also, you can't simulate reciprocity failure when the slide film is exposed for more than a second :) sorry, just not possible without a ton of PS work later.

Originally posted by magnetic9999:

gee, pag. i guess i've never seen velvia film since you said so ;)

04/22/2003 12:08:27 PM · #19

lol. ok. you just keep on going ahead and believing what you want ... ;)

Originally posted by paganini:

04/22/2003 12:10:14 PM · #20

Prove me wrong then :) Shoot a subject with Velvia and one with Canon 10D with in camera settings and show me it produces Velvia-like results.

(Do you even know what reciprocity failure is??)

Originally posted by magnetic9999:

lol. ok. you just keep on going ahead and believing what you want ... ;)

Originally posted by paganini:
Don't know if you have seen it or rather, USE it. It's not the same. You can turn on saturation, adjust exposure and won't get het same results.

Also, you can't simulate reciprocity failure when the slide film is exposed for more than a second :) sorry, just not possible without a ton of PS work later.

Originally posted by magnetic9999:
gee, pag. i guess i've never seen velvia film since you said so ;)

04/22/2003 12:28:00 PM · #21

pag. why do you assume everyone else knows nothing? it's a little bit frustrating because it makes it impossible to communicate with you. Yes, I know what RF is and it doesn't have ANYTHING to do with this conversation or the desirable attributes of velvia film.

when i said i can get velvia like results wiht my camera, a normal person would have said 'oh really? what type of settings?" instead of "no you can't, no one can, you've never even seen or used velvia."

Message edited by author 2003-04-22 12:31:36.

04/22/2003 12:35:37 PM · #22

Either post your photos that shows your results matches velvia, or i am not going to spend time arguing with you :)

RF is not possible to simulate in the camera by itself. It's a chemical process that leads to color shifts massively. Unless you want to play with white blance (in otherwords, you're spending time like you would in Photoshop, as i claimed before), you're not going to get anything near that and I don't think you can get it by simply using a white balance adjustment. It's a COLOR(s) shift specifically.

Furthermore, even with Adobe RGB space, it's still not covering what Velvia sees. No amount of processing can get you there.

Originally posted by magnetic9999:

Message edited by author 2003-04-22 12:36:29.

04/22/2003 12:37:12 PM · #23

most people dont use velvia for it's RF characteristics, dude.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

04/22/2003 12:37:13 PM · #24

well, I think y'all have picked your photography classification pretty well.

Do you get a little Measurbator icon now ?