What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
Who knows you better than your phone? view!
youtube.com - See you from the perspective of your phone.
62 Comments
- bringitontimx, on 10/29/2009, -0/+34Insane. The Kodachrome was truly an amazing invention. If I wasn't informed of when these were taken, I would think they're recent. The quality is comparable (and in many cases BETTER) than the DSLRs people use today, and it makes everything timeless. No matter when it's from. The 1930s, 40s, 50s.. no less real than the 1990s or 2000s. This is significant to me because I was born in the 90s, and all of this seems so ridiculously long ago.
- absolutzombie, on 10/29/2009, -2/+28A damn shame Kodak discontinued Kodachrome. A 35mm slide was equivalent to about a 20 megapixel image, but the dynamic range of like 8 stops is a combo DSLRs still can't touch.
- ldkronos, on 10/29/2009, -2/+191) A 35mm color slide of any type is not even close to 20 mp. Why does this number keep getting bumped up in people's minds? When 4MP cameras were modern, the magic number was 10MP. As cameras creep up around 8 or so it was 15. Now it's 20MP? I'm sorry, but DSLRs were sufficient at outresolving film/slides years ago. I can't wait to hear people in 5 years talking about how film/slide has about 50MP of resolution. Now, medium and large format is a different story, but for 35mm it's history.
2) 5+ years ago consumer DSLRs were shooting 12-bit raw images. Technically, that's 12 stops. However, in order for it to be usable you need to maintain some detail in the shadows, so the bottom few stops aren't really that practical, but 7 to 9 stops was a generally agreed upon number. Now consumer DSLRs do 14-bit raw images, and those extra 2 bits are fully usable. On top of that, sensors have gotten better with respect to noise, and I'd say those lower bits are more usable than ever. 10 or 11 usable stops is not at all unrealistic. - getsome2k, on 10/29/2009, -0/+17very cool! But there is still something to be said for black and white.
- topgigmedia, on 10/29/2009, -1/+17with risk of being a wet blanket here - I think the magic and contrast of light/dark in his work is lost when color is added.
- nerddtvg, on 10/29/2009, -0/+15Gorgeous photos showing real talent. Having to take the photo not knowing how it is going to come out.
- pathouston22, on 10/29/2009, -1/+10The Canon 7D with an APS-C CMOS sensor has about a 7.5 stop dynamic range according to some tests by users. It can be pushed even further with some tweaks.
- YourMomsAnAnon, on 10/29/2009, -0/+8Dynamic range aside, film also handles both peaks with significantly more grace, and film grain could at times be actually desirable unlike digital noise just looking like *****.
- mesasone, on 10/29/2009, -0/+6Ansel didn't shoot 35mm. He shot large format, mostly.
- AmyVernon, on 10/29/2009, -2/+8I agree. These were beautiful photos but can't hold a candle to his black and white photography, where the play of light holds even more importance. He was a master photographer, but especially so when the film was black and white.
- absolutzombie, on 10/29/2009, -0/+6The MP comparison is dynamic - not fixed. Most consumer 35mm films fall in a 10-16MP range, however Kodachrome was special in both grain structure and the way the emulsion was created. Most MP comparisons are made at the native 200 ISO of cameras - even Nikon's 100 ISO is not really 100 - it's extrapolated. 35mm film at 200 ISO is generally in the 10-12MP range, 100 ISO t-grain films are closer to 16MP, 64 ISO Kodachrome because of its special emulsion properties is closer to 20MP, and some of the very slow films, techpans, etc in the 25 ISO range are closer to 24-25MP.
2 - DSLR sensors still only have good mid range latitude, but the upper and lower latitudes are not handled gracefully - film will find details in shadows and highlights that are blown out digitally. There are some very high end cameras that do a FAR better job with this, BUT keep in mind Kodachrome could be used in moderately priced SLR cameras in the 50's, and was far more accessible to a wider range of people than the very high end DSLR's are today. In terms of what's available to the masses, digital is only now starting to get close to what film offered.
I'm not saying digital isn't good - I shot digital professionally for a few years, and now run 8 digital studios, but there are certain qualities of film it can't touch. For instance Adam's traditional medium of 4x5 sheet film black and white image quality still can't be touched, even by camera systems costing in excess of 100k, and not exactly field friendly. In fact - most pro photography shops are reporting the highest 4x5 related sales as they've ever seen.
Film is not dead, but we are losing some niche chunks of it that haven't scaled down to smaller demand as well as others. Kodachrome is one of those, Polaroid film was one of those. - SoCalChris, on 10/29/2009, -0/+6Not sure why pathouston is getting dugg down, Ansel Adams himself said that he hated his color photos. He let a few prints be made of his color work, which he quickly decided that he couldn't stand, and refused to let any more prints be made. After his death, more color prints, and a book were published.
"I hate this color. My reaction is like fingernails on a chalkboard. I can't stand it. Please stop."
-Ansel Adams to his biographer when questioned about his color work
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yhbfr4p
(See first full paragraph on this page) - lagfish, on 10/29/2009, -1/+7The resolution and dynamic range of a large format negative / transparency is not comparable, but much higher than what any DSLR camera today can capture.
- tinkafoo, on 10/29/2009, -1/+7Some guy at an art show told me Ansel Adams was overrated. I wanted to kick him in the nuts right there.
- AgentRoyIV, on 10/29/2009, -0/+5I believe it's because he stated that "any idiot could do [the photos] today". Adams' color photos aren't as 'striking' as his black and white images, but it certainly isn't because of a lack of talent. That man could read light better than a professional meter. His color images have the same exact amazing tonal scale that his black and white images have, but it simply isn't as in-your-face since you're adding an entire color spectrum to them.
- AgentRoyIV, on 10/29/2009, -0/+4Fun fact: Ansel Adams' license plate read "Zone V"
- urbanetruth, on 10/29/2009, -0/+4Nice. There are so many B&W landscape imitators. Maybe they'll all go back to color now.
It's a little bit sad that people are forgetting what 35mm looks like but this is a terrific reminder. - firebhaal, on 10/29/2009, -2/+6I especially like the part where he takes pictures.
- absolutzombie, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3Unfortunately slides start to wash after only about 1hr of projection. In light tight situations this film is archival-stable for 100+ years easy. I think yellow was it's least stable color, and after 100 or 150 years it's only lost about 20% of saturation. However you see those same levels after only 1 hour of projection.
No doubt these images have been projected a few times, were scanned more than once, etc - and have likely lost 15-20% of their original lustre..
In addition, Kodak in general and Kodachrome especially has a tendency to be a little more muted on the green\blue spectrum, and a little more vibrant in fleshtones - reds, oranges.. - ThunderMax, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3This is amazing. I have a deep love for Yosemite and Adams helped keep Yosemite a park and not a dam like the government was planning on turning the Valley into back in the early 1900's.
- c7ean, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3Adams was a great man.
- digitalArtform, on 10/29/2009, -2/+5The blacks are so crushed in some of them. Was that his style? Time magazine's photoshop guy's style? My monitor?
Interesting, though. - WanderOn, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3I'm very thankful I spent a couple hours in my local art gallery when they had his complete works taking up the entire building. Ansel's always been an inspiration.
- absolutzombie, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3Don't worry - the good b/w films will be available for some time. 4x5 sales have been strong, and there are some european manufacturers bringing back old film emulsion styles that have been extinct for several years.. There's more options now in b/w film than there has been in 10 years..
- mkriss5681, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3As a self proclaimed photography nerd there is nothing like the 50-70's Kodachrome. Even though the colors looked kinda fake it made for the best photographs.
- web2pointYo, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3And how many other film types had songs written about them.
- ancientdinko, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3ever heard of Carleton E. Watkins or Charles L. Weed?
I haven't until now, thanks
http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/explore ... - diggB, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3FTA.
Looking into the future, Adams wrote, "I...tremble when I think of the coming tornado of 'color.'"
Damm, if color photography was scary, I wonder what Adams would think of today's digital photography. - absolutzombie, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3The 8 stops of latitude of kodachrome when used properly is one of the reasons old school photographers love it so much. The newer Velvias of the world are much touchier.
- urbanetruth, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2yah, i caught that too. i meant to say film.
- urbanetruth, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2simply awesome
http://digg.com/travel_places/Color_Photography_fr ... - ToRoE, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2I have a number of color prints from Ansel, from the quite complete collection of Arizona Highways Magazine.
Like this two page Monument Valley spread.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_rav/3763939101/ - Philbert, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2One of my Photography teachers in college was friends with Ansel Adams. The teacher loved to joke about how Adams would often dry his test prints in the microwave.
- ldkronos, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2negatives, yeah. Slides, not so well. In fact...I forgot to address that in my reply below, but slide was notorious for poor exposure latitude. Film was graceful at handling overexposure, but not slides.
- andyb747, on 10/29/2009, -2/+4His works are just not the same in color.
http://tinyurl.com/ygou54k - Pinkertinkle, on 10/29/2009, -2/+4as in porn, black and white means classy
- mwomorris, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2Just saw this on the news today:
Someone in LA bought 60 glass negatives for $45 some time back. Turns out they are probably Adams'.
http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-ansel-adams- ... - inactive, on 10/30/2009, -0/+2His pic of Oahu's Pali cliffs is a window into a bygone era- the island has been developed to death since then.
- graemee, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2The negatives here are the same size as the print, possible = to a gigabit sensor today.
- zoomaKabu, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2Pentax Kx http://www.pentaximaging.com/slr/K-x_Black/
"HDR Image Capture
True HDR image capture blends 3 bracketed images into a single picture with outstanding shadow, highlight, and midrange detail." - absolutzombie, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2I just mean the MP comparison is dynamic depending on the film you're talking about. I'm saying your consumer 400 ISO kodak max target film is going to give you a far different MP equivalent than the Velvias, NPH, and Portra films of the world. Just like an APS-C is going to be different than an FX sensor even of the same MP ratings, or CCD is different than CMOS, or 12-bit is different than 14-bit raw. Some of the pro level films are still undergoing improvements, Kodak continues to release new formulations of their pro-level reversal and transparency films, as does Fuji.
Kodachrome hadn't undergone any major changes since K-14 was introduced, but it did have better latitude than most other slide films, and its special emulsion gave sharper images but resulted in a highly complex developing process that only one man in the world still does.
Granted, 90% of the time, digital has now met or exceeded most of the everyday capabilities of 35mm reversal film - there's no reason not to shoot digital for snap shots, catalog, brochure, advertising, or standard portraiture at all these days. But for fine art reproduction, large enlargement, archival qualities, and as a replacement for medium and large format it's just not there. I don't know of any major fine-art photography organizations that even accept digital format - it must be film, and generally slides.
I push and pull film often, less so with digital - but I agree that's the way to go. - Fhwqhgads, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2These would be fantastic wallpapers if they were larger.
- ldkronos, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2"The MP comparison is dynamic - not fixed"
Why? Have any of those films you mentioned undergone technical improvements over the last 5 years that has changed how much data they resolve?
"in the 25 ISO range are closer to 24-25MP"
It's not an equal comparison. It may technically hold that much "data", but you don't need that many megapixels to match or beat it for 99.9% of cases.
"DSLR sensors still only have good mid range latitude, but the upper and lower latitudes are not handled gracefully"
I disagree. They might not handle OVER exposure quite as well as film, but
1) IMHO they more than make up for it with the extended range. I never have any problem with it in my photography. There are few cases where it becomes an issue, other than a single highly over-exposed lightsource like the sun. In those cases, it doesn't look as smooth straight from the camera, but that's 1 problem that is extremely easy to fix in post processing most of the time. Or you can underexpose the photo and blow several stops on those highlights and still come out with similar exposure latitude once you compensate the exposure
2) As I mentioned in my reply to someone else above, we are talking about slide, not negative. Slides were NOT well known for gracefully handling over exposure like negatives were. Commonly agreed upon figures for exposure latitude were 8 stops for negatives and only about 5 stops for slides. - misternils, on 10/29/2009, -1/+2Lagfish is correct. They do have some DSLR backs for largeformat and medium format cameras that are getting there, but still nothing close, and certainly nothing under $10,000 for large format.
- codyraymulcahy, on 10/29/2009, -0/+1...or on a computer monitor!
- quirkopatra, on 10/29/2009, -0/+1Tree barn and Jeffrey pine are my faves here.
- nikorf11, on 10/30/2009, -0/+1haha the zone system. how my 4x5 camera techniques teacher tried to drill these into our heads. they're very useful though.
- codyraymulcahy, on 10/29/2009, -0/+1This completely bastardizes his hard work?
-
Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is