« first day (2485 days earlier)   

8:16 AM
0
Q: Assess a picture's quality (size, contrast, sharpness)

Nicolas RaoulI have millions of pictures of things (buildings, animals, people, etc). Some of the pictures are of bad quality, so they need to be shot again. How to measure the "quality" of each picture? I define "quality" as: Size: the bigger the better. Above 2000*2000 pixels is already good. Contrast: C...

 
 
6 hours later…
2:31 PM
Hi
 
hello @Shyju
 
what app ?
 
not much, tis a slow sort of day. this room is rather quiet. I don't frequent here that often
 
yea
today it is too boring at work
so i decided to stop by and check who is buying new gear
 
i was really silly and bought a film camera despite @MichaelClark 's wisdom lol
i dunno...i guess i just want to experience the same challenges and limitations that today's famous photographers have experienced
not sure how much it could improve my work but it should be fun
 
2:36 PM
i am struggling to stop my urge to get a mirrorless
my current one starting to feel heavy
 
yeah? what are you looking at? I'm interested in the Pentax K1 but then Sony and Nikon glass seems to be rated much better
K1 is also slightly bulky by most standards
 
i am liking the Fuji XPro 2
 
the film cam i got is a pentax mx
ahh! i really like that one too
 
it's damn expensive though
 
just wish it was full frame
 
2:39 PM
i don't care about full frame anymore
 
where are you based if you dont mind me asking?
 
Detroit
 
ah ok
well where i am they're selling for around 1425 euro
 
ok
 
@johnp Are you looking at the totally inexplicable composite scores or the actual measurements? Are you comparing lenses cross brand with cameras that are comparable with regard to resolution? The same high quality lens will generally score much higher at DxO Mark tested on 50MP FF camera than a 20MP APS-C camera.
@johnp Those guys used the best equipment available to them at the time. They did not artificially restrict themselves to the same limits that current technology forced upon their predecessors. In some ways they are considered the pioneers precisely because they found new ways to leverage the newer technology they had than those who came before them.
 
2:44 PM
I'm based in Ireland btw @Shyju Hi Michael, I tried to choose camera bodies on dxomark however they have very limited selection for certain lenses - the pentax glass is mainly K-3 mounted
it's interesting to have a proper database to look at. i only recently discovered it
 
@johnp Then look at the actual measurements of Nikon and Canon glass on similar cameras, not on the flagships. Ignore the composite and MP scores. They make no sense. I've looked at some lenses that were sharper at every aperture and focal length than another lens, performed similarly or better in terms of distortion, CA, vignetting, etc. and still somehow managed to score lower than the other lens.
 
in your opinion, how does modern pentax glass compare with other manufacturers @MichaelClark
thanks for the tips! :) ill keep that in mind
 
@johnp I don't have an opinion of current Pentax glass. The newest K-mount lens I have is from the early 1970s and is mounted on a K1000. It's been at least a decade, maybe two, since I've shot with it.
 
i see, i see
 
Film is much less challenging for a lens than a 30MP+ digital camera. The resolution is higher. The sensor is much flatter.
 
2:53 PM
just tried more comparable res cameras on dxomark. the body makes a huge difference on scores
 
With modern high resolution cameras we can see flange misalignment as small as 20 microns when using sharp wide angle lenses. You can't reasonably manufacture film to accurately sit near perfectly flat within +/-200 microns of the theoretical focal plane of a 135 format film camera.
Also keep in mind that DxO doesn't test very many samples of each lens, and the same lens model may not be the same sample on different bodies, especially those that came out after that lens model was initially tested.
 
@MichaelClark thanks a lot for your kind help, as always! It's much clearer to me now. I don't feel so disappointed now lol. I picked up a Samyang 85mm f1.4 a few weeks ago and it's scored very well. Can't wait to do a proper shoot with it
 
 
1 hour later…
4:26 PM
@Shyju all my new stuff has been video related lately
@Shyju try shooting with a digital cinema camera for a while, it'll make your DSLR feel light in comparison
I've been shooting a streaming TV series for the last month and a half or so on an Ursa Mini. The total rig weighs in at about 12 pounds. Makes my 6-8lb 5D Mark iii rig feel light
@MichaelClark yeah, but at the same time, dealing with the constraints of old stuff forces you to think more. Working within those limitations does force a different perspective and a different focus. You can get that same view without using a film camera, but lots of people just blast and pray without much regard for planning
because it's so cheap and easy now
you don't use a film camera because you want to make pro work with it, you use the best tools available to you for that, but you can use it to learn
It's really, really pronounced in some other areas like video editing where you commonly see a lack of planning in the way new editors work because they can drag and drop and slide everything. If you make them work on a linear editing rig, it forces planning and improves the ability to know what you want before you start. Shooting film requires a similar kind of thought process, though perhaps not quite as pronouned of a difference and it is easy enough to "pretend" your DSLR is film
 
4:51 PM
@AJHenderson There are lessons to be learned that film forces on you a bit more, but a beginner can learn much faster shooting digital. And that doesn't mean they have to shoot 1,000 frames a day. But the instant feedback coupled with the camera recording most of what you did in every shot without having to stop and write it down is invaluable when you are reviewing your shots later and learning from them what worked and what didn't.
 
Yeah, I was just observing a photographer doing a shoot of some athletes recently and one thing that really stood out for me was modern dslr's buffer function. It just eliminates the element of photography that I find fun: capturing the unguarded or the decisive moment that people rant about. You effectively choose that moment in hindsight like a still from a movie. Nothing wrong with that but capturing that moment is what I find fun about photography
 
Likewise, I think you learn much more in a shorter amount of time doing raw development than you can spending more time and money in the chemical darkroom.
 
good point
 
That is assuming one does one's own raw development instead of just applying a chain of 'presets' until one finds one that one thinks looks good.
 
@MichaelClark yeah, I wouldn't recommend film for an absolute beginner, it's more for someone who wants to force themselves to refine their planning
but if you don't have enough experience with what generally works and doesn't, it isn't going to be helpful. Similar thing goes for learning linear video editing
it's more an exercise in improving your skills by removing some of the crutches that can lead to bad habbits
 
5:01 PM
@AJHenderson that was my objective, at least. I also wanted to move to fullframe without being patient and saving for a new camera body lol
 
@johnp yes and no, you still have to anticipate where it will occur and do tracking
and you can't just hold it down non-stop as the buffer fills
 
of course but it still provides a certain amount of leeway that's not economical or possible with film
on the other hand no one's forcing the photographer to use a buffer i suppose
 
@MichaelClark yeah, on the development side, I don't think you really learn much from chemical processes, though I also never personally learned that one, but I can't really picture what you'd pick up that is relevant
@johnp ah, yeah, it isn't really a great alternative for that. You'll pick up a little bit of being able to get narrower depth of fields, but will lose too much in image quality unless you get really really expensive at which point you aren't saving yourself anything anymore
 
@AJHenderson I know, but now I can use the full frame lenses I'm slowly collecting. I'm too impatient lol
 
you can use FF lenses on an APS-C body though
 
5:11 PM
yeah but i dont like the angle of view
 
Get a speed booster
 
first time I've heard about them
 
basically focuses the light from the ff image circle down to an APS-C one
 
interesting, ill have a look into it. thank you :)
 
I've not personally used them as I have a FF dslr, but I've not heard anything bad about them
basically it's the opposite of a teleconverter
which is why it increases lens speed where as a teleconverter slows a lens
 
5:27 PM
the test results are interesting. the trade-off isn't as bad as i expected
 
5:41 PM
yeah, general conclusion is it gains you a lot more than it costs
it isn't perfect, but still, a handy piece of kit
 

« first day (2485 days earlier)