Its a flawed though process. There are reason to use one over the other in many cases. Sure a 4x5 or 8x10 or bigger can make a monster print that will be amazing. I have gallery prints taken with a NEX 7 and Cannon g10. Yeah they are limited in enlargement size but thats a given even any format you choose. Do I like the film Yes. Do I like stopping in the middle of shoot to load or have assistance licking 120 until there tongue is green. Noo. Would I head into the mountain of anywhere with just digital HELL NO. I take a full manual camera and a digital camera.
This was taken with a NEX 7 and a little Contax 28mm lens. Its a pretty awesome 30x20. Thats pretty much is max size. Bigger and it starts to fall apart. So if I had used my Wisner Tech 8x10 Sure I could make a huge monster print
This is from a few minutes later with medium format. (its darker because the sun is union and we couldn't afford the OT)
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Gregory <fyrframe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don't think anyone is suggesting slog a bigger camera down the trail to guarantee better images than using a simpler digital. The "effort" is what decisions do you make in terms of exposure, composition, time of day, elements of the subject matter, focus, fill light or no light. As well as your intended purpose. You want a big mural Half Dome on your wall that displays the quality worthy of museum, you need to consider your medium. You want sharp, clean but little photos for your scrap book or posted to your social medium, then forget the big stuff.
One other thought to consider. If you want dependability in adverse conditions, or extreme uses, "pro" level cameras stand the better chance your whole trip deep into Yellowstone with meet with success. Yes your cell phone may also make the trip.... plus, do you intend on hand holding all of your shots??
Gregory
Gig Harbor, WA.
-----Original Message----- From: Dan Mitchell
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 1:56 AM
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Subject: Re: PHOTOFORUM digest 6423 - effort
Its been a fascinating correspondence, but 2014 awaits me with all its wonders to come, so I'll have a final word on the subject of "effort".
It seems to me that some are saying that "a great deal of effort" expended in the taking of a photo means it somehow must be a "good" picture. So if I slog up to Half-Dome with a monster view camera then the result must be a good picture - and if I go there with a 41 million pixel Nokia 1050 phone, then the result somehow has to be less good.
I think the differing views here are fascinating, part of life's rich tapestry ! So forward to Jan. 7, - what is that you say ? - well its C.E.S. time again.
Dan Mitchell
danmdan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Dan Mitchell <danmdan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dan Mitchell
danmdan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
And what a convenience it is ! No more darkroom, no more smelly chemicals, no more stained carpets and baths, no drying, no glazing - these are but a few of the "conveniences" we now can and (mostly) do enjoy. If we had to have the least convenience we would all be going back to horse drawn portable darkrooms and wet plates.
