Whatever happened to Camera-craft?

A nice Islay malt gets the same results with much less liquid, and more taste rewards. You really need to learn how to work more efficiently :)
 
Pookeyhead said:
LOL.


It's possible to create a A0 image from a ONE megapixel image, but it would look like crap. If you think a A0 print from a 6 mega pixel source is acceptable, then you've got a very different idea of quality than I have. Probably why you're too ashamed to show any work.

All I'm saying is it is impossible to crop into an image and not lose quality. All this rhetoric about whether it's noticeable or not is academic. It does lose quality, and it is a fact. I'm saying no more, or less. Never have :)

Big prints?

If you don't think it's that important to do everything within your power to maintain quality, why did you spend £3000 on a standard lens if you're then just going to crop into your images and begin the process of losing that MINUSCULE amount of quality you've gained by spending £2700 more than everyone else spends on a standard lens?

****ing hypocrite.. LOL

Yeah, and I said... it would have looked crap... you just clearly don't recognise what crap looks like.

I used to have a EOS 350D (8MP) and even at A3 it looked dodgy unless you were far enough away from it, and NO ONE looks at a A3 print from far enough away to hide it, no matter how much you convince yourself they do.
Click to expand...

So the quality it loses you only know about because someone tells you it is cropped because you can't see it? Could you make more of a moot point?
 
Laudrup said:
So the quality it loses you only know about because someone tells you it is cropped because you can't see it? Could you make more of a moot point?
Click to expand...

Depending on how much you crop, it may well be visible. Besides, why lose ANY quality? If you compose the image well in camera it will require no cropping at all, and will incur no loss of quality at all. If you print really big, and are pushing the limits of what the camera is capable of, every little makes a difference. Someone who spent more on a standard lens than some people do on a car should appreciate this, or are you just being obtuse for no particular reason?...or because you don't like me? The latter I think :)
 
I think it's true that most hobby photographers and some pros would not be using their images in a way where the loss of quality from modest cropping would be important.

But....if you've paid through the nose for the best tech for IQ but don't ever use your images for anything where you'd notice the drop in quality from cropping then you need to have a word with yourself.
 
Why? Is there something wrong with treating yourself to nice equipment or is the top stuff only for pros?
 
robj20 said:
Why? Is there something wrong with treating yourself to nice equipment or is the top stuff only for pros?
Click to expand...
Because it's pointless. Of course you can treat yourself to "nice equipment" if you want, it's your money, I just don't understand why you'd want to do that if you're only going to publish in formats where the advantage it provides is not perceivable.
 
Last edited:
robj20 said:
Why? Is there something wrong with treating yourself to nice equipment or is the top stuff only for pros?
Click to expand...

If the top stuff was only for pros, it would be such a niche market that they wouldn't be able to afford it.


Steve.
 
ghoti said:
Because it's pointless. Of course you can treat yourself to "nice equipment" if you want, it's your money, I just don't understand why you'd want to do that if you're only going to publish in formats where the advantage it provides is not perceivable.
Click to expand...

because there's more to top end gear than pixel resolution - e.g focusing, high iso capability etc
 
big soft moose said:
because there's more to top end gear than pixel resolution - e.g focusing, high iso capability etc
Click to expand...
You have a point but the conversation was focused on resolution. Most of the genuine applications of high end tech (such as low light focus and great ISO capability) would produce marked improvements to only a small number of the kind of shots you see posted in this forum (and elsewhere).
 
robj20 said:
Why? Is there something wrong with treating yourself to nice equipment or is the top stuff only for pros?
Click to expand...

Absolutely nothing whatsoever. What's annoying is when people try to justify it rather than actually admitting they just wanted it because it was nice.

Steve Smith said:
If the top stuff was only for pros, it would be such a niche market that they wouldn't be able to afford it.


Steve.
Click to expand...


I agree, and have done so previously in other threads. More pro gear is sold to amateurs than pros. If it wasn't for amateurs wanting shiny things, pro gear would cost a fortune. I just wish amateurs who buy it because they want it, would actually admit it instead of rationalising it the way they do with silly reasons that have no affect on their photography.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Cropping an image, and then representing it at the same size as the original means you've magnified it. Pixels are larger in relation to the original. Quality is lessened.

Sorry, but you're all questioning a fact. Any image that has been cropped is lower in resolution than the original image, hence lower in quality.

This is an indisputable fact.

If I take a 8x10 image, and crop it in half to get a 4x5 image, then if I keep it at 4x5 the relative quality will be identical, yes, but if I then enlarge it back to 8x10 I have reduced quality. Even if I do not though, and keep it at 4x5, it contains less pixels than the 8x10 original, and is therefore a lower quality image.

Fact.
Click to expand...

Steve smith expressed it perfectly in his post above. (apart from the speling)

"You either lose quality whilst mainatining size or you maintain quality but size is reduced".

And just to be picky, if you crop a 10 x 8 image in half you get a 5 x 8 image (or 10 x 4). but I'm sure you knew that;).
 
jerry12953 said:
Steve smith expressed it perfectly in his post above. (apart from the speling)

"You either lose quality whilst mainatining size or you maintain quality but size is reduced".
Click to expand...


Errr.. yeah. Pretty much what I said.
 
The version I prefer is "when two people think exactly the same, only one of them is doing the thinking".
 
Only if the two people know each other... maybe...

So when Baird and Jenkins were both building their television prototypes at the same time, and demonstrated them publicly in 1925, in different countries, only one of them was doing any thinking? :)
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
Only if the two people know each other... maybe...

So when Baird and Jenkins were both building their television prototypes at the same time, and demonstrated them publicly in 1925, in different countries, only one of them was doing any thinking? :)
Click to expand...
Or neither of them were doing much 'thinking' because they both invented crap mechanical systems
 
Or Bell and Watson both inventing the telephone.

And the 'crap' mechanical systems however, were the inspiration for the electronic EMI system as they all used the concept of scanning one line at a time.


Steve.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget Watson & Crick..... delivering DNA over a pint in The Eagle, Cambridge! :)
 
And all of those other inventors who have claimed to have already invented many of the great ideas I have had in the past!


Steve.
 
ghoti said:
Stealing the idea from Rosalind Franklin over a pint in The Eagle, Cambridge, more like.
Click to expand...

Well, the tables are pretty close together ;)
 
BillN_33 said:
what do you think about this image - the one on the home page

http://davidyarrow.photography

to me it is a very very good image - but is it art? …….. without taking anything away from it …… I would say no

and some of these wonderful shots

http://davidyarrow.photography/gallery/indigenous-communities/

http://davidyarrow.photography/gallery/wildlife/

http://davidyarrow.photography/gallery/new-releases/
Click to expand...

Oooh.... some of these shots have turned up in the Nikon PRO magazine :)

(See - I do read everything when I create a thread :) ) --- Ok, nobody has said I didn't, just saying then!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top