Lamma Forums
http://www.lamma.com.hk/forum-OK/

Film versus Digital
http://www.lamma.com.hk/forum-OK/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=6689
Page 2 of 3

Author:  Kalistofa [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:01 am ]
Post subject: 

Fortune Chan wrote:

Quote:
Were you ever kicked in the head by a horse?

You are a dumbo who clearly does know what drivel you spout. . . . .

Go away before someone pours ink in your hair and steals your packed lunch.


When I read these forums, Fortune, I become surprised you would single me out for special attention.

Author:  Fortune Chan [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:27 am ]
Post subject: 

Oh well, such is life...

Author:  Geno [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Photos

Kalistofa, you are obviously interested in photography so show us some of your photographs so we can judge for ourselves whether we like them or not.
Most people who view images in magazines,books or online have no idea about colour space or image resolution. The picture either has an impact on them or it doesn't.

Author:  Kalistofa [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:49 pm ]
Post subject: 

Actually, Geno, I began this new topic with three of my own images. Go back to GO.

However, I did NOT post them for people to make meaningless comments, such as "I like them." They are meant to provoke discussion about Film versus Digital and associated issues such as the creative validity of processing images in software.

The mythical "most people" are not our concern. I started this topic as a place for rational discussion, not declarations of personal taste. I think this topic is potentially quite long-term, so there's no rush.

Author:  Granola Eater [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:00 pm ]
Post subject: 

Kalistofa wrote:
I think this topic is potentially quite long-term.

Naw, I think you're going to self-destruct again, Spinoza.

Author:  Geno [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Photos

Kalistofa, you are obviously interested in photography so show us some of your photographs so we can judge for ourselves whether we like them or not.
Most people who view images in magazines,books or online have no idea about colour space or image resolution. The picture either has an impact on them or it doesn't.

Author:  Geno [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:54 pm ]
Post subject: 

Sorry, my mistake. I thought you were discussing the art of photography.
I will leave you to chat about your cameras and computers.

Author:  Alan [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:17 pm ]
Post subject: 

Granola Eater wrote:
Naw, I think you're going to self-destruct again, Spinoza.


Despite some worrying similarities, I'm pretty sure Kalistofa is a different entity.

They even had a few run ins back in the day.

Author:  Kalistofa [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:21 pm ]
Post subject: 

Sorry, Granola Eater, Alan's correct. it may make you happy to fantasize you are still flogging the corpse of Spinoza, but I am not Spinoza.

Spinoza, that's months old (years old?), and you're way off target. My advice: get out of the house a bit, catch up with the world. Lamma's a bit of a mental cave, Granola. I'd hate to see you stuck in it.

And how about some genuine input to this topic instead of yet another attempt to hi-jack a forum with your whimsical crapola, Granola?

Author:  Kalistofa [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:33 pm ]
Post subject: 

Geno wrote,

Quote:
Sorry, my mistake. I thought you were discussing the art of photography.
I will leave you to chat about your cameras and computers.


Geno, we are interested in the relationship between the art of photography, computers, and cameras both digital and analog. We have never made any distinction between the art (if that is what it is) and the technology.

The focus is Digital versus Film, the merits and de-merits of either or both.

If people post their pics here, my hope is that they would post to address the issues, not simply treat the forum as just another place to publish stuff.

Author:  Fortune Chan [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:53 pm ]
Post subject: 

I took this with my Samsung Sureshot. I set the dial to "nice"...

Attachments:
sureshot.jpg
sureshot.jpg [ 35.29 KiB | Viewed 702 times ]

Author:  Kalistofa [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:08 pm ]
Post subject: 

Fortune, what other dial options were available on your Canon . . . . uh . . . sorry, Samsung Sureshot?

Author:  Blazenski [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:40 pm ]
Post subject: 

I called an urgent meeting of my photographer friends to discuss the issue of digital vs film at the Deli (see below) and we all agree. Digital is the way to go. Reasons: convenience, cost (delete shots that are no good without losing money), instant feedback, ease of processing image to achieve desired effect. Film is dead.

Attachments:
photographers.jpg
photographers.jpg [ 27.43 KiB | Viewed 669 times ]

Author:  Fortune Chan [ Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:43 pm ]
Post subject: 

I took this with my Sony... or in fact was it Canon Sureshoot and turned to "not light" on the dial. I like it not very light.

Attachments:
not_light.jpg
not_light.jpg [ 91.51 KiB | Viewed 658 times ]

Author:  Lamma-Gung [ Fri May 01, 2009 8:19 am ]
Post subject: 

Blazenski wrote:
...meeting of my photographer friends...

Love the beret caps and moustaches. These must be French photographers, non?

Is there a dress code for Lamma photographers, I wonder?

Author:  G.O.D.S [ Fri May 01, 2009 8:52 am ]
Post subject: 

hey fortune, that pictures pretty good. you should do a show on lamma, maybe in caffs bar or something.

Author:  Kalistofa [ Fri May 01, 2009 10:11 am ]
Post subject: 

Quote:
hey fortune, that pictures pretty good. you should do a show on lamma, maybe in caffs bar or something.


An interesting suggestion G.O.D.S. Under what name do you suggest Fortune would show these works?

What do you make of that signature at lower right on the dark pic? Take a screen shot, crop out the sig, enlarge the image and see if you can read Fortune Chan.

And the show catalog would list a Sureshot (sic) camera by Canon, Sony or Samsung? Then the show notes would say something like: "The artist entered a so-called 'nice' period around 2008-9, often choosing to shoot with the camera set to the 'nice' setting. Alternatively, Chan would sometimes choose 'not light.'"

To cut a long story short, G.O.D.S,. both of the images posted here by Fortune are in fact by Ansel Adams.

Still, a show in caffs (sic) bar of Adams' work under the name of Fortune Chan is an interesting idea. I wonder if any would sell. And at what price?

Author:  Blazenski [ Fri May 01, 2009 11:10 am ]
Post subject: 

Quote:
These must be French photographers, non?

No Scottish gentlemen, actually. The portrait is by Alexander Asher taken in Edinburgh around 1880.

Interesting that Fortune should choose an Ansel Adams photograph to plagiarize (he's not quite as moronic as he seems). Adams himself was a master of manipulating the printing process to achieve his effects, like making the sky darker to highlight the moon in his most famous shot Moonrise over Hernandez, New Mexico. This is a breeze with modern imaging technology, but much more difficult in the darkroom.

Is this Art? Obviously, because punters are willing to pay up to US80,000 for a print, so it must be!

See: http://www.afterimagegallery.com/featureadams.htm

Note also this comment from the sales blurb:

"Also, the image you are looking at was made with a digital camera set up about 12 feet away. The actual print is, of course, much sharper and more beautiful than its reproduction here."

Well worth the 80 grand in my humble opinion

Author:  Kalistofa [ Fri May 01, 2009 11:40 am ]
Post subject: 

Adams is on record offering music as an analogy for darkroom development and printing. The negative is the composer's score. The darkroom process is the performance, with a wide range of possibility.

Great video of Adams talking about this at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWhQGU2RYuM&NR=1

It's also clear in this video that Adams clearly foresaw the future convergence of photography and electronics, but his attitude seems quite positive.

Author:  Fortune Chan [ Fri May 01, 2009 4:50 pm ]
Post subject: 

It sure is razor sharp in here.

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC + 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/