Posted by Mark Windom on August 11, 2006 at 6:28 PM
I realize the answer to this question is a subjective one, a matter of opinion, but I would appreciate any responses. My aging (not old) body is demanding that I lighten my load (currently using an Arca-Swiss 69 and all its necessary paraphenalia). However image quality is a top priority for me as I shoot for stock, calendar, magazines, etc. I'm wondering what would give me a better image quality file, that from the 5D or that from a 645 tranny scanned with the Nikon 9000??? Any thoughts.
Also, if you were to recommend one book for the Photoshop beginner what would it be. My head is spinning from all the choices.
We put all our 645's on the shelf after comparing results from our lab with the 6mp Fuji S2. Direct prints from 645 negatives were probably superior, but we felt the results with scanned film were inferior. I'm not acquainted with the 5D, but I have to guess that it performs even better than the ancient Fuji S2.
Posted by Simon Allenby on August 12, 2006 at 10:36 AM
Mark,
Though I think/know you will/would be very well satisfied with the results produced by the 5D; however, my suggestion before making a switch to digital capture would be to first check with your clients to see if they will accept image submissions taken from the 5D.
Regards, Simon
PS -- Missed you at Rainier -- hope you had as good a time as I did (spent most of my time off the beaten path).
Posted by Mark Windom on August 12, 2006 at 11:14 AM
Thanks much, everyone. The 5D it is. I see that Haynes is coming out with a "CS2 and beyond" version of his Artistry book; I'll pick that up once it's released.
Simon--great advice and that is something I have already done. The stock agency prefers digital but most everyone else still wants film and for that reason I'll be holding onto my Arca for awhile longer. I'm anxious to hear about your time at Rainier this year and will send you an e-mail later today.
Posted by Jerry Greer on August 12, 2006 at 11:17 AM
Simon,
From a publishers view, we are now moving to not accepting film at all. Way too many hazards from loss and damage. I'd much rather have the images sent in high-rez tiffs. With the photographers that we use most are professionals and have the knowledge of converting the RAW file to a publishable tiff.
Posted by Simon Allenby on August 12, 2006 at 12:54 PM
Jerry,
My advice to Mark was just cautionary, many/some editors may not be as progressive as you are, and I think it is better to check up front than to switch to digital capture only to find your established client/s will not accept your submissions. In my own case I have not had any problems, in fact my experience with clients is similar to what you describe as your policies, however, knowing some of Mark's clients, I'm not sure he will have the same luck.
Regards, Simon
Posted by Colin Smale on August 19, 2006 at 5:06 PM
Discussion
8 repliesAlso, if you were to recommend one book for the Photoshop beginner what would it be. My head is spinning from all the choices.
Thanks in advance.
One book (likely the only one you'll ever need): Photoshop Artistry by Barry Haynes
Guy
Though I think/know you will/would be very well satisfied with the results produced by the 5D; however, my suggestion before making a switch to digital capture would be to first check with your clients to see if they will accept image submissions taken from the 5D.
Regards, Simon
PS -- Missed you at Rainier -- hope you had as good a time as I did (spent most of my time off the beaten path).
Simon--great advice and that is something I have already done. The stock agency prefers digital but most everyone else still wants film and for that reason I'll be holding onto my Arca for awhile longer. I'm anxious to hear about your time at Rainier this year and will send you an e-mail later today.
From a publishers view, we are now moving to not accepting film at all. Way too many hazards from loss and damage. I'd much rather have the images sent in high-rez tiffs. With the photographers that we use most are professionals and have the knowledge of converting the RAW file to a publishable tiff.
My advice to Mark was just cautionary, many/some editors may not be as progressive as you are, and I think it is better to check up front than to switch to digital capture only to find your established client/s will not accept your submissions. In my own case I have not had any problems, in fact my experience with clients is similar to what you describe as your policies, however, knowing some of Mark's clients, I'm not sure he will have the same luck.
Regards, Simon