Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Defining a look

Subject: [OM] Re: Defining a look
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 21:07:25 -0500
What are you smokin'?  Must be you're on something to try and equate a 
2/3 digital sensor with medium format film and try to tie it to depth of 
field for what is essentially infinity for both cameras.

For the canyon shots I see some very, very beautiful and (mostly) richly 
saturated images.  Maybe you shoot Velvia on your 645 and are confusing 
yourself.  Sorry, I don't see anything I'd call a "look".  Practicing 
for the art exhibit bio perhaps?  :-)

Chuck Norcutt

AG Schnozz wrote:
> How do you define or describe "a look"? When is a camera capable of
> achieving something beyond the specifications or your expectations?
> 
> This is a question I have often pondered.  My A1 is heading off to
> Sony for a sensor replacement and I've been looking over images taken
> with it wondering if I should just replace the camera with something
> different.
> 
> Something strange happens each time I do this.  I see "a look" with
> the camera which is very unique and unusual.  This is the ONLY small
> or medium format camera I've ever used which is able to achieve a 4x5
> look.  Part of it is the image h/w ratio, but there is something else
> going on too.  DOF?  Possible.  Response curves and dynamic range? 
> Again, possible.
> 
> Here are examples:
> 
> http://image66media.com/Gallery/GC01/gc2004_10
> http://image66media.com/Gallery/GC01/gc2004_06
> http://image66media.com/Gallery/GC01/gc2004_11
> http://image66media.com/Gallery/IsleRoyale01/PICT2456163
> http://www.image66media.com/articles.html
> 
> When shot side-by-side with my E-1 for landscape work, the A1
> achieves a different image. Just as 35mm gives you a different look
> than 4x5.  The E-1 is a cross between 35mm and 645, whereas the
> A1--even with the smaller sensor gives a look more like a 6x7 or 4x5.
> 
> To be fair, though, these characteristics have been attainable with
> the outstanding RawShooter converter, but there's something going on
> which I cannot explain.
> 
> Have others noted a simularity with their 2/3" cameras?  Am I smokin
> my shorts again?  Have I inadvertantly stumbled upon a
> camera/converter combination that exceeds anything the designers ever
> imagined?  Is there a dog?
> 
> AG
> 
> 
>  
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com.  Try it now.
> 
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
> 
> 
> 

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz