Jump to content


3000psi

Member Since 10 Jul 2005
Offline Last Active Jun 22 2008 06:23 AM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Nikon D3 & D300. Hands on and test shots

22 October 2007 - 06:24 AM

WOW ... I am impressed how Nikon continues pay attention to ergonomics. :)

In Topic: Why the dearth of medium format housings?!

21 October 2007 - 10:13 AM

I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread and while I can't really add to much that has already been said without rehashing it there are a few statements that caught my attention.

I think the consensus of the thread is that MF has severe limitations underwater but there is no doubt it can be adapted to certain situations where it might / will out perform dslr.

Dan said ...." The underwater macro gallery exhibit in the American Express building lobby by Michael ("Mickey") Maurer two years ago inspired me to submerge my camera gear. (The exhibition was shepherded through production by Lisa Fiel (who also had this exhibition a block away in the Conde Nast (4 Times Square) lobby; and the curator for both exhibitions for The Durst Organization was (is) Lanny Powers).

The issue Mickey had is that because all of his images were shot on 35mm film, very few of his enlargements were over 16x20 inches; while Lisa's prints shot on 6x45 were as large as 40x50 inches."

Two years ago has become a lifetime with the advent of digital photography. If someone's intent is to make enlargements for their home then the current dslr crop of cameras are more than adequate to fill this need. While cameras continue to increase their mp's most walls in homes and buildings don't seem to be keeping up. At least mine don't :) While there may be some advantage with MF when it comes to enlargements this gap has closed and will get less meaningful as dslr continues to offer more and more mp's.

The other comment that caught my eye was when Troy said : "By the way, I print canvas giclees almost on a daily basis and there is a more natural professional quality in mf prints compared to 35mm. Consumers don't usually see the difference, prosumers should see it and professional really enjoy the difference."

This comes back around to the point of what market you are shooting for. Most people I know that shoot commercially shoot for the public ... i.e. consumers. If a consumer can't tell the difference why should a editor, retailer, etc. spend the extra money that I am sure a MF shooter needs to charge ? I have yet to find anyone unfamiliar with photography that when shown a 16 x 20 print could tell me the format or camera it was shot with.

I think as photographers we get caught up with shooting for our peers when mostly it is the consumer who sees our work either in magazines, exhibits, presentations, etc. I recently was asked to be one of four judges at a photography competition. The photos I thought were best had nice poster board backgrounds that made the subjects pop. Two of the judges, who were not photographers, mentioned that was the one quality they did not like about the photographs. One commented it looked too much like studio shots and the other mentioned it was nature and the backgrounds should be in focus. So much for spending that money on lenses that produce good bokeh.

Although my comments may sound like I'm knocking MF I am really not. If I lived where Troy does and had the money I would be shooting MF some. But I can't see investing in a MF system (which would need to include two digital backs in case of flooding) and trying to travel with it all across the globe.

I hope to get to see some of Troy's work as I would love to see the results of his MF system that he and Dan are so passionate about.

Now bring on the thread about housing a 4 x 5. After all if MF is this good imagine what a 4 x 5 could do. Does anyone know if Ernest Brooks II has moved to digital ?

In Topic: Advice on Resorts w/Shore Diving -Indonesia & Papua

05 April 2007 - 08:53 PM

Thanks everyone for your comments and suggestions. I thought I would update this thread since our trip and let anyone interested know the outcome.

We decided to stick with our original intentions of staying at Kri despite the expected cost of shore diving. The alure of Raja Ampat was just too much and it was too late to try to find a liveaboard to coincide with our dates or for only a week trip. We did extend our stay at Lembeh Resort by a couple of days. So we had 5 days of diving in Lembeh and 5 and a half days on Kri (no diving on Saturday is permitted).

The staff and dive guides at Kri could not have been nicer. A good time was had by all. There was no miscommunication on the cost of shore diving. They do charge and it does have to be guided. Never really got an anwser on why. If I went back I would probably look into a liveaboard as mentioned by several of you above. The added cost of additonal dives whether from shore or extra boat dives above your prepaid package brings some liveaboards more in line with the land based option. (more so if you compare to Sorido Bay) If you toss in no diving on Saturday at the resorts you even pick up an extra day of diving on the liveaboards. The no diving on Saturday was not a big deal for a couple of us in our group as we enjoy birding as well and the opportunity to see the Red Bird of Paradise was something we wanted to do while visting that part of the world anyway. However I am sure the liveaboards may have been able to accomodate such a request as well. We had purchased the week package with 12 dives included. All dives above this cost 37 euros but some discounting begins with 5, 10 and 15 dive purchases. We basicaly did 3 dives a day for our stay there so we had an additonal 4 dives we had to pay for above our package.

The land base did provide us with an opportunity to explore the island a little during surface intervals and when doing some other dive sites further from the resort we spent our surface intervals in villages allowing us to observe their daily lives. One thing we did hear was there is evidently some resentment by the villages concerning liveaboards plying their waters and anchoring off their shores with no benefit / compensation to them. One village we were at had tenders delivering guests from a liveaboard anchored offshore. I know Max, the owner of Kri and Sorido Bay, was compensating the village for the privilege of their hospitality but can only guess not all liveaboards do the same. I could see where providing compensation might get out of hand as the location we visited to see the Red Bird of Paradise was evidently not the one used a couple of weeks before our arrival as that village had decided they wanted more money from Max so he had negotiated with a new village who had access to some of the birds.

Just a quick note about Lembeh Resort as it too was very accomodating. Again the staff and dive guides could not have been nicer. I will attempt to add a trip report in the appropriate section in the next week. In the meantime if anyone has any specific questions I will be happy to respond.