[AGL] Mike Attack

[Gerry]

Mike and John,
Yeah, you city cats who live in high rises in the middle of large colonies
beneath the dark brown cloud, seeing so many faces every day, idolizing a
photographer of, well, geeks...It figures, shoot what you see. Not that I
don't appreciate the late Ms. Arbus, but a little goes a long way.

While I'm not into landscape art (bluebonnets in Texas, desert scapes in NM,
etc), photos of non-human natural subjects are my preference. I once watched
a UT grad and onetime fellow student named Jim Bones photograph plants for
inclusion in the Seeds of Change catalogue, not easy but beautiful when done
well. BTW, that catalogue has superb photography. If you want to study
photos of people I recommend the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition,
currently available on the web with Brazilian models included...

Ewie, a friend for 50 years and a genuine Renaissance man, shoots
everything, with a 4X5, and does a dammed good job of it. He probably prints
more in a week (when he isn't globetrotting) than you guys do in a year.
Check out his website. Not to say that he is all knowing and perfect (he
doesn't spell well) but he does spend lots of time outdoors where the faces
are few and the subjects and the light change with the seasons.
G


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Ford" <jonmfordster at hotmail.com>
To: <austin-ghetto-list at pairlist.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: [AGL] Mike Attack



> <IMHO, a photographer should be allowed to shoot one sunset a

> year.

>

> my taste in photography is more oriented towards Diane Arbus.>

>

> Mike-- I couldn't agree more.

>

> Jon

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> >From: "Michael Eisenstadt" <michaele at ando.pair.com>

> >Reply-To: survivors' reminiscences about Austin Ghetto Daze in the

> >60s<austin-ghetto-list at pairlist.net>

> >To: "survivors' reminiscences about Austin Ghetto Daze in the

> >60s"<austin-ghetto-list at pairlist.net>

> >Subject: Re: [AGL] Mike Attack

> >Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 09:01:59 -0600

> >

> >i hadnt seen the bottom part of Ewie's supercilious email.

> >

> >Ewie, you do nature photography, right?

> >

> >IMHO, a photographer should be allowed to shoot one sunset a

> >year.

> >

> >my taste in photography is more oriented towards Diane Arbus.

> >

> >like Hans Otto a professional photographer on our list, having

> >learnt how photography is/has been done starting with t-shirts

> >ruined by doing chemical processing, i dont need your introductory

> >instruction on color casts and what it doesnt say on the little yellow

> >boxes. and your advice to get my monitor adjusted because i seem

> >to be a self-admitted computer something. this from a guy who cant

> >do multiplication by threes.

> >

> >weren't you the guy with the self-nullifying philosophy mantra a

> >few threads back on this list?

> >

> >i met you briefly at a Dave Moriaty party. you didnt want to talk

> >about your heroic sailboat adventure that landed you in Hawaii

> >in one piece. you are married to a chinese woman and we have

> >met your ex-wife who does artistry hereabouts involving birdcages.

> >

> >well howdy there pardner. Dave Martinez told me he used to

> >room with you in Austin

> >

> >on a not unrelated subject, when is the next reunion? where

> >everyone, even me, is invited to.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >----- Original Message -----

> >From: "Bill Irwin" <billi at aloha.net>

> >To: "survivors' reminiscences about Austin Ghetto Daze in the 60s"

> ><austin-ghetto-list at pairlist.net>

> >Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 4:31 PM

> >Subject: Re: [AGL] Mike Attack

> >

> >

> > > Mike, maybe you don't understand this resolution thing, it is

confusing.

> > > The D5 does not produce a 39meg file, if it did they would be

> >advertising

> > > the fact all over the place.

> > > Here is a quote from the Cannon site:

> > > File size:

> > > (1) Large/Fine: Approx. 4.6MB (4,368 x 2,912) (2) Large/Normal 2.3MB

> > > (4,368

> > > x 2,912) (3) Medium/Fine: Approx. 2.7MB (3,168 x 2,112) (4)

> >Medium/Normal:

> > > Approx. 1.4MB (3,168 x 2,112) (5) Small/Fine: Approx. 2.0MB (2,496 x

> > > 1,664)

> > > (6) Small/Normal: Approx. 1.0MB (2,496 x 1,664) (7) RAW: Approx.

12.9MB

> > > (4,368 x 2,912)

> > >

> > > If it could produce a 39meg file they would certainly say so.

> > >

> > > I didn't see Polidori's photos but if they all look a little blue to

you

> > > that may be a sign that you monitor is not color corrected.  Since you

> > > seem

> > > to be a computer buff I guess you know that monitors do not always

> >display

> > > the correct colors and for critical work they need to be calibrated so

> > > things have the correct color.   I have been doing this stuff for a

few

> > > years and it is true if a scene is illuminated just by sky light only

> >such

> > > as in the shade,  can have a bit of a blue cast.  But if you have a

blue

> > > sky

> > > that means you have the sun out and scenes in sunlight never have this

> > > blue

> > > cast - the engineers at Kodak have figured this out and make their

film

> >to

> > > show pretty damn good colors.

> > >

> > > Better get your monitor calibrated if you want to peruse a career as

> >photo

> > > critic.

> > > Aloha

> > >

> > > ----- Original Message -----

> > > From: "Michael Eisenstadt" <mike.eisenstadt at gmail.com>

> > >

> > >

> > >> Ewie,

> > >>

> > >> You've got the numbers right and wrong at the same time.

> > >>

> > >> The Canon D5's sensor is 35.8 x 23.9 mm, the same size

> > >> as a frame of 35mm film. It has 12.7 million pixels, its

> > >> maxiumum resolution being 4368 x 2912. Multiply that

> > >> and you get 12.7 million. Then multiply 3x for the 3 primary

> > >> colors and the raw file size is 39Megs, the same in effect as

> > >> the 40Megs you mention.

> > >>

> > >> Same as your camera and scanner without the muss and bother of

> > >> film and chemical darkrooms.

> > >>

> > >> As for speed, this camera shoots 3 frames a second in

> > >> burst mode. The specs do not supply shutter lag time

> > >> if any. Body is made of magnesium, the lightest metal.

> > >>

> > >> $2700 is Amazon's discount price for the camera new.

> > >> It will take some years before a used one will come

> > >> close enough to my money comfort zone, maybe never.

> > >> Meanwhile, i will use film in my Canon cameras,

> > >> process the slides, chose the keepers, scan them

> > >> for $1.90 a frame, correct the scan's levels in Photoshop,

> > >> and print on 8x11 inch glossy fake photography paper.

> > >>

> > >> Meanwhile, looking at Polidori's indoor shots of ruined

> > >> interiors in post-Katrina New Orleans, it is hard to overlook

> > >> the blue color casts of his incompetence. He was shooting

> > >> without a flash indoors on a sunny day. Objects in the

> > >> shadow on a sunny day are of course illuminated by

> > >> the blue light of the sky. So photos not shot in direct

> > >> light, sunlight or flash, are caca: Aunt Tilly under a tree when

> > >> she comes back from the drugstore is colored blue. They

> > >> don't tell you about that on the little yellow boxes. Might

> > >> reduce sales.

> > >>

> > >> Mike

> > >>

> > >>

> > >> > Well, Mike the Cannon D5 is a nice camera and I would like somebody

> >to

> > >> > give

> > >> > me one but it is 3 times the price of a Cannon Elan7 and scanner

> >combo.

> > >> > Another problem for me with expensive cameras is the problem of

them

> > >> > getting

> > >> > stolen, I had one stolen in China but it was only a $500 loss,

can't

> > >> > afford

> > >> > the $3000 loss.  A 35mm slide scanned at 4000 DPI comes to about 40

> > >> > meg,

> > >> > the

> > >> > Cannon D5 only 12.8 meg.  I don't know if the Cannon has this

problem

> > > but

> > >> > many digital cameras have a significant lag between pushing the

> >shutter

> > >> > and

> > >> > the actual scan making them a little difficult for capturing fast

> > > action.

> > >> > Film cameras only 1/60 sec. or less.

> > >> >

> > >> > Now if you are a real purest you can get the Hasselblad for only

> > >> > $31,995

> > >> > but

> > >> > sill you will not get the resolution of a scanned 35mm slide.  But

if

> > > you

> > >> > are a real resolution fanatic get the 4x5 camera - the only way to

> >go!!

> > >> > You

> > >> > can buy them on Ebay for around $500.

> > >> >

> > >> > The processing of color film is a bit of a problem but you can do

it

> > >> > yourself or send it out.  Doing it yourself and sending it out cost

> > > about

> > >> > the same price.  Only problem is not instant gratification.  Some

art

> > >> > forms

> > >> > require a little work.

> > >> >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

> _________________________________________________________________

> Find what you need at prices you'll love. Compare products and save at

MSN®

> Shopping.

>

http://shopping.msn.com/default/shp/?ptnrid=37,ptnrdata=24102&tcode=T001MSN2
0A0701

>

>