Nice article in the OP landscape issue!
Really enjoyed reading it and am glad for you to be featured in there more regularily.
Although I have to say, I hoped to get to know any NEW talents featured their portfolios (along with new creative ways of landscape photography) and wonder how long it takes, until they find out that there is quite a talent living in Corvallis/Oregon who should be featured, instead of showing us the same ol' (very good) photographers, that we know anyway...
Thumbing through the issue, I can't shake feeling I have seen this all before.
Georg
I do mean your article is the exception here, as most readers will probably find them new and inspiring. Wouldn't I know NPN, I would have been extremely pleased to see these photographs!
What we're talking about is an article by Guy Tal, "The Changing Landscape of Printing." It is in the August 2007 issue of Outdoor Photographer.
I guess I'm more interested in the comment about moving into D-SLR photography after large format.
One of the things LF photographers seem to love doing is making enormous prints. Enorminty begins at 24x36" as far as I'm concerned. That's a far cry from the 8x10s mentioned in the article. Guy, are you still (or did you ever) make those big 'uns?
Another thing I've heard, is that the movements available in an LF camera were so important that any flat "film" camera would always be inferior. What happened to that?
Belated congrats on the article, as I imagine it was submitted edited and proofed months ago.
Pete, a single exposure from a D-SLR doesn't have anywhere near the level of detail as a 4x5 scan, but stitch a few of them together and detail is no longer an issue. I have made some large prints but by far most of the ones I sell and exhibit are 16x24 or smaller.
Movements are important for *some* images, certainly not always. In some cases I still wish I had them but with many of my favorite compositions being intimate rather than grand, I don't miss them often.
Camera gear selection is always about compromises. There's no way around it.
Sure enough, one should be informed, that stitching is often not an option due to unstable elements in an image (moving plants, waves etc and also changing light) Unfortunatly it is very often the case, that it is exactly these images that are most striking... An LF image is still one compact thing not a puzzle.
I also believe, but this might be more controversial, that shooting LF is the closest thing to making no compromises. (concerning landscape photography) The biggest compromise too many LF'ers might do is, using it only in comfortable, easy to reach locations instead of taking it wherever a spectacular scene might be. Physical fitness in LF is a major factor, if you want to produce interesting images. It is too easy and too seducing to become a "roadside-shooter".
Selling more (cheaper) smaller prints instead of bigger (pricier) prints is only a matter of marketing strategy not sg related to the digital photo-age. We, f.e., work in a completely opposite direction and I think folks like Fatali and Dykinga and the likes do not sell many 8x10's either.
Sure enough, one should be informed, that stitching is often not an option due to unstable elements in an image (moving plants, waves etc and also changing light) Unfortunatly it is very often the case, that it is exactly these images that are most striking... An LF image is still one compact thing not a puzzle. >>>
This is also one of the reasons why it is not possible to get a fine panorama image with stitching and I'm looking forward to the 6x12 or 6x17 back.
But again scanning and other factors play a major role in final outcome. So what GT said - Camera gear selection is always about compromises. There's no way around it.
Any chance of reading it online Guy? It is not easy to access OP over here in Germany.
Georg, do you know any source?
Discussion
6 repliesReally enjoyed reading it and am glad for you to be featured in there more regularily.
Although I have to say, I hoped to get to know any NEW talents featured their portfolios (along with new creative ways of landscape photography) and wonder how long it takes, until they find out that there is quite a talent living in Corvallis/Oregon who should be featured, instead of showing us the same ol' (very good) photographers, that we know anyway...
Thumbing through the issue, I can't shake feeling I have seen this all before.
Georg
I do mean your article is the exception here, as most readers will probably find them new and inspiring. Wouldn't I know NPN, I would have been extremely pleased to see these photographs!
I guess I'm more interested in the comment about moving into D-SLR photography after large format.
One of the things LF photographers seem to love doing is making enormous prints. Enorminty begins at 24x36" as far as I'm concerned. That's a far cry from the 8x10s mentioned in the article. Guy, are you still (or did you ever) make those big 'uns?
Another thing I've heard, is that the movements available in an LF camera were so important that any flat "film" camera would always be inferior. What happened to that?
Belated congrats on the article, as I imagine it was submitted edited and proofed months ago.
Regards, Pete D.
Movements are important for *some* images, certainly not always. In some cases I still wish I had them but with many of my favorite compositions being intimate rather than grand, I don't miss them often.
Camera gear selection is always about compromises. There's no way around it.
Guy
I also believe, but this might be more controversial, that shooting LF is the closest thing to making no compromises. (concerning landscape photography) The biggest compromise too many LF'ers might do is, using it only in comfortable, easy to reach locations instead of taking it wherever a spectacular scene might be. Physical fitness in LF is a major factor, if you want to produce interesting images. It is too easy and too seducing to become a "roadside-shooter".
Selling more (cheaper) smaller prints instead of bigger (pricier) prints is only a matter of marketing strategy not sg related to the digital photo-age. We, f.e., work in a completely opposite direction and I think folks like Fatali and Dykinga and the likes do not sell many 8x10's either.
Georg
This is also one of the reasons why it is not possible to get a fine panorama image with stitching and I'm looking forward to the 6x12 or 6x17 back.
But again scanning and other factors play a major role in final outcome. So what GT said - Camera gear selection is always about compromises. There's no way around it.
Any chance of reading it online Guy? It is not easy to access OP over here in Germany.
Georg, do you know any source?
Here's the link to the articles in this issue of Outdoor Photographer, including Guy's article:
http://www.outdoorphotographer.com/content/2007/index.shtml
I've yet to read it, my copy isn't in the mail yet, but I guess I can read it online, too!