'kina fever
Today I spent the day at the Photokina fair in Cologne. In an odd kind of way these buzzy shows always have a faintly depressing, nauseating effect on me. One does see a lot of bad photography on a day like this. The marketing hubbub surrounding the new introductions borders on the infantile. One has to wade through an ocean of trivia to find an occasional piece of genuine interest. And the king-size Krakauer Wurst doesn’t help ...
Anyway the big theme, it seems to me, is the conflation of medium-end digital markets. The full frame 15 to 20 Mpixel DSLR is becoming a standard for the semi-professional user, closing the gap with the digital back/medium format segment that starts out at 16 Mpixel. The new Leica S2 (now on display but likely available only summer 2009!) promises to bring high end DSLR even more firmly into medium format territory. So a ferocious competitive battle is breaking loose for the lucrative market of the advanced amateur/semi-pro/mainstream professional photographer. Nikon, Canon, Sony, Leica, Hasselblad, Phase One and Mamiya will vie for critical mass in their market shares. Personally I am not tempted. I spent some time today at the Hasselblad booth, looking at the HD3-31 and the CFV-II back. I like the latter’s concept – a 16 Mp back with a sizeable sensor to fit the good old Hassy bodies and lenses – but in practice I must say it has “compromise” written all over it. The 1,5x elongation factor is one big minus. And there are all kinds of fiddly issues – related to hardware and software – that seems to make it rather cumbersome to operate. With the SWC there is even more fiddling as the synchronisation between shutter and button is not 100% (hence the notice on the website that this is combo is not recommended for critical applications). But maybe that’s just a matter of getting used to. Question is, of course, to what extent a 16 Mp back @ 8000 euro, even taking into account the bigger sensor, is still competitive when 3000 euro DSLRs are routinely pushing the 20Mp limit. Then, as regards the H3, I’ve never taken a liking to the Hasselblad H-series and that didn’t change today. I don’t like the plastic, the grey colour, the general shape and design of the thing. Nice viewfinder, though. But there is no doubt that the H3 does not have the appeal for me of a well-crafted instrument such as the Alpa, Linhof of Arca-Swiss, all of which I had the pleasure of fondling today.
I didn’t pay any attention today to the new crop of DSLRs, not even to the 5D Mk II. True, the 22 Mp and the ruggedised body are a selling point, but I couldn’t care less about the Live View and the Video functionality and the other tiddlybits. From my point of view a good example of the trivialisation of photography. Some people now claim that moving images are going to compete much more with still images. Well, so be it. I wish the videographers good luck. From my point of view they are two very different media and I see no reason for conflating the technologies in a single package (because, even if I were interested in both still and moving images, it would be for very different reasons and would require very different technological solutions as well).
But that’s not all. My mindset when I went in this morning was one of being quite open to digital. We’re getting used to the idea after all. But now, having in the space of a few hours seen maybe hundreds of prints from digital cameras, my belief in the merits of film has once more been strengthened. There is an awful lot that is downright shamefully bad in digital, there is a lot that is good too and there is some that is spectacular (in its resolution, colour and tone), but at the end of the day it simply is something different. The images have a different feel. It may be stupefyingly accomplished but very often there is no real life to it. That is what I could not help but noticing today. My recent musical experience serves me very well to articulate this difference: today we have very sophisticated digital sound recordings. Bit rates have ratcheted up to 20, to 24 bits. We have SACD. Sound engineers are able to capture a symphony orchestra at full throttle with uncanny precision. One can listen in awe and STILL not forget for a moment that one is listening to an sound recording. Compare that to the visceral effect of a vinyl disc. Purely technically it is less than perfect but the instrumental timbres and the voices shine with a naturalness, character and radiance that is simply captivating. And so it comes that one can be fully engrossed listening to an old LP, as a matter of course forgetting the hiss, pops and clicks. I find the same is very much true when comparing film to digital. Film is not perfect, objectively less sharp, but in some unfathomable way it has a life that cannot be captured by digital. And it becomes even more complicated when one takes into account that a part of the magic remains after scanning a negative. There is not a shade of doubt in my mind that the most impressive exhibition I saw today was devoted to individual and group portraits from the American Civil War. These were 130 year old collodion plates, scanned, restored and printed in big formats! Amazing! Such a wonderful, lively detail! Nothing digital I have seen today comes even close.
So this tells me to continue to rely on the hybrid solution. I have every possible analogue camera I’d want to use (from 24x36 up to 20x25) and there are plenty of interesting emulsions around. However, if I take the hybrid route really seriously I will need to invest in a better scanner. That market is completely stagnant. Photokina had nothing new to offer on that account. There is the Nikon LS9000 at 2500 euro or the Hasselblad X1 at around 10.000 euro and nothing in between. In terms of printing it seems options are increasing with HP and also Canon successfully challenging Epson in the large format, professional end of the spectrum. I’ve heard very good things today about the HP 3200 from Stephen Johnson who was at the Hahnemühle booth. In media, there is a profusion of papers to satisfy every taste. For me, the Ilford Baryta Gold looks like a very nice stock but other manufacturers have competitive offers. So, yes, for me there is future in film. It was a good day at Photokina today ...
Anyway the big theme, it seems to me, is the conflation of medium-end digital markets. The full frame 15 to 20 Mpixel DSLR is becoming a standard for the semi-professional user, closing the gap with the digital back/medium format segment that starts out at 16 Mpixel. The new Leica S2 (now on display but likely available only summer 2009!) promises to bring high end DSLR even more firmly into medium format territory. So a ferocious competitive battle is breaking loose for the lucrative market of the advanced amateur/semi-pro/mainstream professional photographer. Nikon, Canon, Sony, Leica, Hasselblad, Phase One and Mamiya will vie for critical mass in their market shares. Personally I am not tempted. I spent some time today at the Hasselblad booth, looking at the HD3-31 and the CFV-II back. I like the latter’s concept – a 16 Mp back with a sizeable sensor to fit the good old Hassy bodies and lenses – but in practice I must say it has “compromise” written all over it. The 1,5x elongation factor is one big minus. And there are all kinds of fiddly issues – related to hardware and software – that seems to make it rather cumbersome to operate. With the SWC there is even more fiddling as the synchronisation between shutter and button is not 100% (hence the notice on the website that this is combo is not recommended for critical applications). But maybe that’s just a matter of getting used to. Question is, of course, to what extent a 16 Mp back @ 8000 euro, even taking into account the bigger sensor, is still competitive when 3000 euro DSLRs are routinely pushing the 20Mp limit. Then, as regards the H3, I’ve never taken a liking to the Hasselblad H-series and that didn’t change today. I don’t like the plastic, the grey colour, the general shape and design of the thing. Nice viewfinder, though. But there is no doubt that the H3 does not have the appeal for me of a well-crafted instrument such as the Alpa, Linhof of Arca-Swiss, all of which I had the pleasure of fondling today.
I didn’t pay any attention today to the new crop of DSLRs, not even to the 5D Mk II. True, the 22 Mp and the ruggedised body are a selling point, but I couldn’t care less about the Live View and the Video functionality and the other tiddlybits. From my point of view a good example of the trivialisation of photography. Some people now claim that moving images are going to compete much more with still images. Well, so be it. I wish the videographers good luck. From my point of view they are two very different media and I see no reason for conflating the technologies in a single package (because, even if I were interested in both still and moving images, it would be for very different reasons and would require very different technological solutions as well).
But that’s not all. My mindset when I went in this morning was one of being quite open to digital. We’re getting used to the idea after all. But now, having in the space of a few hours seen maybe hundreds of prints from digital cameras, my belief in the merits of film has once more been strengthened. There is an awful lot that is downright shamefully bad in digital, there is a lot that is good too and there is some that is spectacular (in its resolution, colour and tone), but at the end of the day it simply is something different. The images have a different feel. It may be stupefyingly accomplished but very often there is no real life to it. That is what I could not help but noticing today. My recent musical experience serves me very well to articulate this difference: today we have very sophisticated digital sound recordings. Bit rates have ratcheted up to 20, to 24 bits. We have SACD. Sound engineers are able to capture a symphony orchestra at full throttle with uncanny precision. One can listen in awe and STILL not forget for a moment that one is listening to an sound recording. Compare that to the visceral effect of a vinyl disc. Purely technically it is less than perfect but the instrumental timbres and the voices shine with a naturalness, character and radiance that is simply captivating. And so it comes that one can be fully engrossed listening to an old LP, as a matter of course forgetting the hiss, pops and clicks. I find the same is very much true when comparing film to digital. Film is not perfect, objectively less sharp, but in some unfathomable way it has a life that cannot be captured by digital. And it becomes even more complicated when one takes into account that a part of the magic remains after scanning a negative. There is not a shade of doubt in my mind that the most impressive exhibition I saw today was devoted to individual and group portraits from the American Civil War. These were 130 year old collodion plates, scanned, restored and printed in big formats! Amazing! Such a wonderful, lively detail! Nothing digital I have seen today comes even close.
So this tells me to continue to rely on the hybrid solution. I have every possible analogue camera I’d want to use (from 24x36 up to 20x25) and there are plenty of interesting emulsions around. However, if I take the hybrid route really seriously I will need to invest in a better scanner. That market is completely stagnant. Photokina had nothing new to offer on that account. There is the Nikon LS9000 at 2500 euro or the Hasselblad X1 at around 10.000 euro and nothing in between. In terms of printing it seems options are increasing with HP and also Canon successfully challenging Epson in the large format, professional end of the spectrum. I’ve heard very good things today about the HP 3200 from Stephen Johnson who was at the Hahnemühle booth. In media, there is a profusion of papers to satisfy every taste. For me, the Ilford Baryta Gold looks like a very nice stock but other manufacturers have competitive offers. So, yes, for me there is future in film. It was a good day at Photokina today ...
posted by Philippe at
10:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home