I hope you replaced your scanning charges with file prep charges?

I have a feeling Adrian knows how to charge.

Digital advantages over film when teaching:
- instant feedback to try until getting better results (let's face it as a substitute to costly Polaroids)
- cheap to work with and EXPERIMENT
- very fast group interaction in reviewing works
- the actual working reality (how many customers to request digital vs how many for film?)

Most kids couldn't care less about film, and why should they: that's just another old-timer nostalgic stuff. The only practical use I can see is the one mentioned by Randy Becker about 4x5", and then who among them will be using one if most of us working pros have one in a closet and don't use it anymore?

Hello Francisco,

Very true that not many pros are using 4x5, though there are some notable pros at the high end who are using large format. Kids like old school style film, while I find more baby boomers heavy into the latest D-SLRs . . . which makes sense because they have more money to throw into getting the latest.

Film request compared to digital request . . . I don't actually know anyone shooting and delivering film. I do know photographers shooting film and delivering digitally.

Funny thing on clients requesting digital; I shot a Contax 645 with PhaseOne back due to a client request. There was also film shot at the same location, which was later scanned. The client got a CD-R of low res images for selection. More of the scanned film shots were selected as final images than the PhaseOne shots. Just for fun, I asked the client if he could tell which shots were film, and which were from the PhaseOne, and they thought all the shots I sent them were from the PhaseOne. Granted that most photographers could probably pick out which was which, but I doubt many clients can tell.

Film class would be like a history class, but there is certainly value in learning history.

Scotti

quote:

Very true that not many pros are using 4x5, though there are some notable pros at the high end who are using large format

I've said this before and I'll say it again, but a friend who works in the digital department at one of the top labs here in LA says that 4x5 is very much alive and well. Mostly architecture photographers, but also some top art photographers and even some highly paid portrait shooters still use it. 8x10 too, though not very much.

What's long been dead is 35mm, with medium format declining rapidly but not dead yet.

quote:

Main downside to digital is hearing every person who has digital say that they have the best system and how film is dead. I am happy shooting on either and would miss either if they didn't exist. My clients pushed me into digital because they like things quick and without scanning charges. Both as you can see, have the above benefits and more. Neither is better in every way. They are different - like color or B&W

Though I've been doing this a fraction of the time you have, that's been my experience as well. Turnaround time and scanning charges are the biggest factor even though post-prod charges negate much of the time and cost difference. It sure shortens the shoot time and/or lets you try different angles quite easily, which my clients seem to like.

That said, if I remember correctly, you were never a view camera or 4x5 guy. I *really* miss using my 4x5 and practically beg clients to let me use it, but increasingly the response is "naw, your SLR will be good enough, they're just for our web site, promo material, and ads in trade mags."

Sigh. I guess they don't want the giant ego prints for their office anymore, but not many architectural firms are rolling in dough right now.

BTW, I went to a museum exhibit Steve Erlich put together of (mostly) Southern California architecture (and mostly his company's work) that was fantastic. Above every model was an enormous print hanging from the ceiling of the finished project. Most of the projects pre-dated high rez digital and it was clear they were all captured with 4x5 or 8x10 and they were glorious.

I know you can't do that with a Canon Mk3 because a friend and I did a test; we up-rez'd a single-frame file to what would have been about 4x5.5 feet and printed some crops of it on the Epson. Then we did the same thing from a couple of my 4x5 scans and there weren't even remotely comparable. Apples and spaceships not even close.

Have you printed that big with your current system?

Turnaround time and scanning charges are the biggest factor

Kevin,

That's what ended it for me. My clients did not want to pay for drum scans....even though they're paying more now for digital. Go figure!

Scotti

What tars me about digital view camera systems is that I have to rent a $1000+ worth of gear including a tech to keep the workflow moving. Even then I need more hours in post prod to make it look right, so the net result doesn't save them very much time or money but it's what they wanted to use so I didn't have a choice. But I've only been in that situation once and won't do it again.

Stil, I find myself bidding against guys who bought or leased high end gear and aren't charging much more if any to use it. They're also faster with the turnarounds since they know their own systems better than the stuff I have to rent.

Can't blame them really; if I had a $600-900+ lease to pay every month I'd do everything I could to make that payment, even if it meant earning peanuts on a shoot so I wouldn't default on the financing. Either they're trust fund babies or just plain stupid, but that's what I'm increasingly up against.

Guys like Adrian and others at the top of the food chain don't have this problem, but the people in my league who bet the farm on a high rez system and don't charge enough for it put me at a distinct disadvantage. Catch 22.

I've thought about it, believe me. Did the math, ran various business models, and realized that I'm better off NOT WORKING than carrying all that debt! It's a little depressing to be honest because I'd really love to have a better digital solution than my DSLR can provide.

But I also need a new car, am getting married in a few months, and am still paying off loans I took on to get my business started, such as it is.

Sorry to vent but I know I'm not the only one in a similar situation.

I hear you on that Kevin. Recently had a band tell me about someone doing shots of one of their performances, and the photographer gave them about 150 shots . . . free. Apparently she shoots weddings usually, and is interested in one of the guys in that band. My remark was that I cannot afford to give away my images.

Unfortunately this is the sort of stuff that comes up time to time. How many frustrated wedding photographers (or other weekenders) are out there giving away what they do in an attempt to get into something else? I already saw this in the film and television industries, people working for nothing on crews hoping to get picked up for a steady paying gig; the saddest thing was that for every one of them that walked away, there was another person ready to try the same thing . . . and the production companies know this. I hope stills photography never gets to this point.

We cannot market what we do based upon our gear, otherwise we are no different than a rental place. I even keep a list of current rental prices in my Palm Pilot, figuring that the rental places priced accordingly for profits. If I cannot make more from a shoot than what it would cost me to rent my own gear, then what would be the point in doing the shoot; yet we still hear about people doing exactly that, pricing their images below their cost of doing business. So maybe my volume of work is not as great, but I get to work with companies that like the style of shooting I do, and who understand the value of the images.

Beyond whether or not to teach film techniques, or anything about gear, photography and art students today need to know about business. Less than 5% of them will get hired by a company. About five years after graduating, barely 10% will still be in a creative profession. Tell them about FotoQuote, ASMP, APA, EP, and give them every tool possible to let them understand how to make a living from what they can do. Despite the term artist being applied to way too many people or things, the reality is that only a small percentage of people are truly creative. That rare skill should be compensated well, cultivated, and not squandered. Do fail to do that, we and our clients would be much worse off.

I once found a sign framed a lobby while waiting to visit a prospect to quote a job, that said:

"I don't mind how you came up to your price, I'll pick the lowest."

There obviously was no need to wait.

Kevin - one does not have to bet the farm to get into a digital back - there are so many deals floating around on demo, used or refurbished backs are extremely low prices.

Just taking a look at Capture Integrations list of Demo backs - you can get a P25 for $12,990, P45 for $17,990, P21 $7,999, P30 for $11,990 - and these mounts: Mamiya 645AFD, Blad H & V, Contax 645AFD.

I also do not get this whole need for a digital tech nonsense. Come on the friggn programs are so damn simple to operate, it just really seems silly to me - but there are exceptions I guess.

The pond is shrinking...the fish are getting nervous.

The trouble is that it is cheaper to afford something than not to, if that makes sense.

I have never bought on credit because I have bought something only when I knew I needed it. When you need it for your business to improve, then you have to buy it because your business is your employer. If buying a cool suit or buying an expensive golf course membership will impress your boss, then it is just something you have to do.

The ONLY reason I went digital is because my clients wanted me to. I am not sure if I made more money with film/scanning profit (anyone want to buy an Imacon 343?) than I do now with my digital fees but that is not the point. Like someone pointed out, the client's view now is generaly that film and scanning is slower and more expensive. That being untrue doesn't matter - it is what the clients believe. Clients are sheep - like me buying, Canon, Nikon or Phase because they are what is expected. Clients 'expect' tings from us too. Digital images on a laptop are much more familiar to them than the 'dark art' of film/light meters/cc filters/push processing etc that was OUR world just a few years ago. Clients trusted us because we did all these strange things before taking a shot and they could trust us that an image would be correct when they saw it as film a couple of days later. I was so confident that I used to have my film sent straight from the lab to my clients without even looking at it! That confidence is part of the reason clients hire you and why you are relaxed while shooting.
Now clients want to see everything, know a bit about PS, so start asking you to "just change the curve a bit so it sparkles a bit more" while you are shooting. They are now knowledgable about our equipment, our process and our way of shooting.
I am not saying this is wrong but before I would tell a client "trust me" and now they tell me "show me". Sometimes I don't take the laptop on a shoot and only let them see the image on the back of the camera and amazingly, the clients are cool with that and some of the "trust" is put back into the relationship. Of course a shoot is about teamwork and working together to get the best result but no way would I never tell a client that the typeface they have picked to go with my work is not the best, or their layout ruins the images. But that is what we now get with digital.
This sounds like a rant and it isn't. In a roundabout way, I am saying that if you need to get high end digital, then you need it. If you make $500 on digital fees per day shoot, then after 60 shoots a brand new P45+ is paid for. That is about one day's shoot a week - less with tax depreciation etc. I am sure most of you guys shoot that often. Even if you only shoot once a fortnight it is paid off in 2 years and if you buy the best, that thing should last at least 4 years. So after it is paid off, you are looking at 100% profit, not paying rental fees and spending the time going to and fro the rental dept.

Our business has gone one way and I have been dragged with it. I can and do shoot film and love it. Unfortunately we are in business and to make a living, sometimes yu have to wear that crappy suit and listen to the BS on the proverbial fairway.

Shout out to the person that said that Mk3 files don't hold a candle to 4x5. I prefer my film results (6x7 slide) to my p45+ files every time - especialy the lack of flare, smoother gradation and nicer shadows.
Not sure how many silver halide crystals are in a square inch, but am sure it's more than the number of pixels in my p45+

Here is a guy talking through his USB
http://www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek05/tw0225/0225bp_digitalphotography.htm

Anyone know where I can buy that 144Mp camera?

Adrian

Anyone know where I can buy that 144Mp camera?

Google search picked up this...
http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGL...s&btnG=Google+Search

Which led to....
http://www.betterlight.com/

Mark.....

Hey, I have some crazy glue, an old plate camera somewhere and an unused imacon 343. This gives me a great idea.....

Love the way the guy got all sorts of PR for his cutting edge technology that was bought off the shelf.

Actualy, the reason I heard about this guy was that he was pitching his work to a client of mine who had no idea why he would ever want either a file that big, or a format that was too wide to use on a computer screen presentation or be published in a magazine that was a vertical format.
Like fisheye lenses or the prints from my 360 camera, these things are just gimmicks really.

I told someone off last week because they expained how happy they were that their new pont and shoot had a widescreen panoramic format setting. I pointed out that the camera simply crops a bit of the top and bottom off the full image to give that effect and it would be better to have all the image and crop it himself.

Adrian