Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              8      
9
       end
  

Archive 2013 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses
  
 
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #1 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


gdanmitchell wrote:
Do you realize that you are not contradicting me at all when you write this? (Though, I'd point out that slipping "wants" in there before "needs" gets at my point just a bit...) ;-)

Dan


Sure. And did you realize my goal isn't really to just go out and be contradictory?

It's obvious that certain pros use expensive gear and you say so yourself, so that's not the issue. And we all know that pros don't always use the most expensive gear, so that's not the issue either. Really what's in question is the attempt to paint a picture marginalizing the practical value of expensive gear.

The following statement (which is how you started your post) is in my opinion where the mischaracterization occurs....

gdanmitchell wrote:
"There is an odd belief that so-called "working pros" need the most expensive and cutting edge equipment, but that isn't really the case at all."

...since it is innaccurate on two levels: the first being that there is this "odd belief" which no one here has actually expressed, and the second being that "it isn't really the case at all" because sometimes it actually is the case that the photographer does need the most expensive piece of equipment for a particular task.




Jan 15, 2013 at 08:57 PM
veroman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #2 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


skibum5 wrote:
....with newsprint you can often get away with a ton of noise and even what would be noticeably soft on a high-quality moderate sized print. Even if a different sensor might make the pics a bit better maybe there is no way for the pro to make that be able to bring in more money and thus the pro might give while the amateur might have fun making use of what the new sensor brings. It all depends. For some scenarios the amateur may be more picky about the sensor. And hardly every pro brings in the same take as
...Show more

I'm not sure you have any experience in the area you're discussing above. It doesn't sound like you do. For instance, one of my nieces is a staff photographer with a small-town newspaper, but a highly respected one. She shoots with a Canon 1D IV, which is the newspaper's property.

Indeed, most of the small town and even large town newspapers provide the gear ... and it's usually excellent gear ... the kind that won't introduce unnecessary noise and that has accurate, fast AF. The fact is, any newspaper or magazine worth its newsstand cost will be very picky indeed about the cameras and lenses and other gear they purchase for their photographers.

If there are any staff photo journalists out there who are shooting with a company-owned camera that's older than, say, a Canon 1D III or Nikon D2x, I'd like to know about it. So far, the photogs I know of, my niece included, are shooting with first-rate gear. The images in the New York Times Sunday Magazine sure bear that out.

- Steve



Jan 15, 2013 at 09:07 PM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #3 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


skibum5 wrote:
OTOH maybe their are consequences in that the amateur sees something worse technically in his picture and that is a consequence and the pro doesn't since maybe the quality is already fine enough for the particular job at hand or there is no way for him/her to monetize it enough to make the body cost effective, while the amateur may measure cost effective in other terms, which may be potentially tighter terms.

And what if the pro goes around to all the schools and snaps grade and middle school portraits and what if the amateur loves shooting soccer and football? Maybe
...Show more
Well, when I say "consequences" I mean something that has fiscal and professional ramifications. Not just being bummed that your images don't look as good as you'd like them to. Consequences as in if you screw up a job then you never get any more work from that client, or they spread negative opinions about your work to other clients, or that you don't get paid for not delivering the product you said you would.



Jan 15, 2013 at 09:13 PM
Kirivon
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #4 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


gdanmitchell wrote:
While I'm sympathetic to a number of your underlying points (e.g. - that cameras/lenses are just tools), I didn't realize that when you wrote about "most of the arguments here" being "straw man" arguments that you were referring to the rest of your own post! ;-)


Hey, I addressed it in my post!

Kirivon wrote:
Granted these arguments are just as straw-man as the ones they were meant to debunk, but it's just to demonstrate that everything depends on the individual circumstance.


And anyway, I was speaking in a method that would, uh, be well received by the reader base? Or, uh, it was being ironic? It certainly had nothing to do with straw-man arguments being easy to put together, lazy and sensational. :P



Jan 15, 2013 at 10:11 PM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #5 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


LensRentals hosts the Hammer Forum!




Jan 15, 2013 at 11:07 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #6 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


veroman wrote:
I'm not sure you have any experience in the area you're discussing above. It doesn't sound like you do. For instance, one of my nieces is a staff photographer with a small-town newspaper, but a highly respected one. She shoots with a Canon 1D IV, which is the newspaper's property.

Indeed, most of the small town and even large town newspapers provide the gear ... and it's usually excellent gear ... the kind that won't introduce unnecessary noise and that has accurate, fast AF. The fact is, any newspaper or magazine worth its newsstand cost will be very picky indeed about
...Show more

I actually do have some such experience. You can definitely get away with more for typical small newsprint image than for a high quality mag page than for a high quality double page mag spread than for a 19x13" print than for 38x26" print.

There were still many shooting 1D2 even when 1D3/1D4 were out and had better sensors. It's a rough market with not much money in it these days, staff getting let go, publications folding. Often the serious amateur with money was able to move to the new stuff much sooner. Some small papers even had just a few xxD as staff bodies. In some cases people used their own equipment. It depended.



Edited on Jan 17, 2013 at 12:31 AM · View previous versions



Jan 15, 2013 at 11:15 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #7 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


artd wrote:
Well, when I say "consequences" I mean something that has fiscal and professional ramifications. Not just being bummed that your images don't look as good as you'd like them to. Consequences as in if you screw up a job then you never get any more work from that client, or they spread negative opinions about your work to other clients, or that you don't get paid for not delivering the product you said you would.


OK, fair enough in that sense

(although in this cases it depends upon what sort of pro too, in some cases it may be more about just having decent fps and some reliable fps than the sensor)



Jan 15, 2013 at 11:17 PM
hugodrax
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #8 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


chez wrote:
I wonder who the real "crackpots" are. The people who buy the utmost expensive gear for the perceived gain in image quality or the people who continually come onto these boards and put down these said people by labeling them as gear heads trying to buy their way to better photos.

It's interesting to see the same crowd over and over crowing the same old BS that new expensive gear won't improve your photography. Can't anyone these days buy new gear just for the sake of buying new gear? Are we all not guilty of this, buying something just because we
...Show more


This topic seems a sensitive one for you. Why?



Jan 16, 2013 at 12:45 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #9 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


chez wrote:
I wonder who the real "crackpots" are. The people who buy the utmost expensive gear for the perceived gain in image quality or the people who continually come onto these boards and put down these said people by labeling them as gear heads trying to buy their way to better photos.

It's interesting to see the same crowd over and over crowing the same old BS that new expensive gear won't improve your photography. Can't anyone these days buy new gear just for the sake of buying new gear? Are we all not guilty of this, buying something just because we
...Show more

Yup.

And if you took the way view far enough, soon enough nobody ever needs more than a pinhole camera since great art has been accomplished with such things.

And just because something is a snapshot doesn't mean it doesn't matter what it was taken with to some. Maybe someone likes to be able to pan around all sorts of cool detail from a very high MP camera taken with sharp lenses and marvelous colors and range in a quick snap fired off somewhere. The raw technical quality of a snapshot can matter as much or more than to a non-snapshot and a snapshot can be as important to someone as something laboriously planned out.

And for the get out and shoot crowd, I've often seen those who get most insulting about the tech heads and pixel peepers then have nothing but small galleries filled with OOF shots of cats in the backyard and some they were bashing then whip out extensive galleries from around the world encompassing every type of photography under the sun. (not that it really matters any when the galleries are swapped between the two, so what)

Granted it is possible for some, at times, to get totally caught up in thinking you need this or that to have fun or to take anything less than atrocious and certainly spending time looking over galleries and weekly shot this threads and stuff can be worthwhile to helping ce



Jan 16, 2013 at 01:17 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



hugodrax
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #10 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


Grantland wrote:
please define - "pro photographer"?

thanks


Pick an choose one.

http://www.viiphoto.com




Jan 16, 2013 at 01:49 AM
Paul Mo
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #11 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


All I want is a 35mm f1.4 and a 300mm f4L IS. Then my kit will be complete. I'll be set for years except for a faster computer to make PP more enjoyable.

I'm about to take my foot off the GAS.



Jan 16, 2013 at 02:17 AM
thw2
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #12 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


Monito wrote:

LensRentals hosts the Hammer Forum!
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/media/2012/03/sttntb15mc.jpg


So true and so easily ignored....



Jan 16, 2013 at 02:49 AM
beautox
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #13 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses




The only benefit of the better digital cables is extra shielding, which is only useful if they're used in an environment that would otherwise cause dropouts due to interference. And there's enough bandwidth and noise margin built into digital specifications to account for mass-produced consumer-grade cables without dropouts...unless the person is setting up their audio system next to a coal-fired generator.


snapsy, you might think so but your understanding is not complete. I agree that it's trivial to gets bits intact from one place to another, but in digital audio it's not just the bits that count, it's the timing of the bits.

A lot of the differences that can be heard between different digital audio gear is due to timing inaccuracies, which is often called jitter (not entirely correct, but we'll leave that).

A digital cable should have a specific characteristic impedance, usually 75R. If a cable does not have the correct impedance then you get signals being reflected back, which can add to the timing uncertainty.

(Although I am quite new to photography (only about 10 years), I've been designing audio gear for 30+ years)



Jan 16, 2013 at 03:27 AM
snapsy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #14 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


beautox wrote:
snapsy, you might think so but your understanding is not complete. I agree that it's trivial to gets bits intact from one place to another, but in digital audio it's not just the bits that count, it's the timing of the bits.

A lot of the differences that can be heard between different digital audio gear is due to timing inaccuracies, which is often called jitter (not entirely correct, but we'll leave that).

A digital cable should have a specific characteristic impedance, usually 75R. If a cable does not have the correct impedance then you get signals being reflected back, which can
...Show more

I've debugged my fair share of impedance mismatch signaling issues, sometimes with 32 bits running in parallel on custom hardware+cables at speeds that were a two generations beyond what was commercially available at the time in transreceiver technology. And I still use a $3 impedance-mismatched RCA cable to run my digital audio



Jan 16, 2013 at 04:10 AM
Paul Mo
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #15 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


Here you go guys:

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/forum.php



Jan 16, 2013 at 04:19 AM
OntheRez
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #16 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


veroman wrote:
I'm not sure you have any experience in the area you're discussing above. It doesn't sound like you do. For instance, one of my nieces is a staff photographer with a small-town newspaper, but a highly respected one. She shoots with a Canon 1D IV, which is the newspaper's property.

Indeed, most of the small town and even large town newspapers provide the gear ... and it's usually excellent gear ... the kind that won't introduce unnecessary noise and that has accurate, fast AF. The fact is, any newspaper or magazine worth its newsstand cost will be very picky indeed about
...Show more

Steve,
I'm not sure what your data set is for the assertion, "The fact is, any newspaper or magazine worth its newsstand cost will be very picky indeed about the cameras and lenses and other gear they purchase for their photographers." The paper I shoot for has a set of Xsi with maybe the 55-250mm lens on them. When I first started shooting for them they offered me one. Obviously my 1DIV is orders of magnitude more capable of getting good images in difficult conditions than any Rebel. I've never done any sort of study as to what cameras the papers around here issue (if they do) and can only go on what I know from fellow photogs I've encountered while working. A 50D is the best paper issued gear I've heard of. Now if your job is to take pictures of the garden club, or the school board, or a 4H prize steer, a 50D is likely to give you everything you need. Sports in the dark are a whole different question.

I also don't know how you define "small town." Glendale, AZ (pop 230K) is considered small relative to its neighbor Phoenix (pop 1.4M) but when one considers towns like Gila Bend, Morenci, Bisbee, Ajo (all less than 7k) Glendale is huge. In this case the Glendale issues some type of Nikon D3? to its photogs. In the case of all of the other mentioned towns they either a) require the photog to provide his/her gear or b) don't have anything more advanced than an xxD. Also, all of the truly small town papers are using one of two printers in the Metro area and keeping costs down is essential to their survival. My paper prints on a "65 line screen" which my publisher notes has all the subtlety of "smearing tar on canvas." It is a real challenge to produce good images because so much detail is lost in printing and one never knows if the pressman is going to run dark or light this week.

While it is generally conceded that "print is dying" in truly small and isolated towns like all of those mentioned above, the local paper is the ONLY means of communication within the town so they hang on as no other media outlet in the state is even aware of them. How long they will last is probably a function of the dedication of the owner/publisher. In the case of my paper, its brother and sister team are the 3rd generation who have owned it since its founding nearly 100 years ago. I don't see their children being interested in the work so this could be the end.

Robert



Jan 16, 2013 at 04:45 PM
veroman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #17 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


OntheRez wrote:
Steve,
I'm not sure what your data set is for the assertion, "The fact is, any newspaper or magazine worth its newsstand cost will be very picky indeed about the cameras and lenses and other gear they purchase for their photographers." The paper I shoot for has a set of Xsi with maybe the 55-250mm lens on them. When I first started shooting for them they offered me one. Obviously my 1DIV is orders of magnitude more capable of getting good images in difficult conditions than any Rebel. I've never done any sort of study as to what cameras the papers
...Show more

Robert: my "data set" is obviously small and limited to those magazines and papers I'm familiar with, including the photographers who work for them. I shouldn't have generalized. I'm sure there are more papers and mags issuing xsi's and the like than there are ones issuing 1D IVs and Nikon D3s. But I still believe that the publications that really care are issuing top gear to their staffers. The xsi, by the way, is an excellent little camera. One of my all-time favorites, IQ-wise. Not the best for high speed and low light, though.

- Steve



Jan 16, 2013 at 08:58 PM
alvit
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.9 #18 · Keeping up with the Jonses vs BEING the Jonses


ebrandon wrote:
it's having something new to play with.


Yes, and it works with a new wife too



Jan 17, 2013 at 11:42 PM
1       2       3              8      
9
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              8      
9
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password