privatebydesign said:
jrista said:
I just don't like having to invest so much time in making my photos great,
That is what I said, and as a professional in another area I can understand why you feel like that, but I think it is disingenuous and bogus. If we could all do everything as well as anybody else there would be no value to anything.
Well let me simply straiten out the record here. It is not disingenuous. It is not bogus. I really don't care if you cannot understand why I, and people like me, care...but we do. Most of my time is spent on astrophotography these days, however when I get deep into the bird and wildlife photography, I can bring back four or five cards full of photographs. Most of it is bursts, 5-8 frames, to capture the best moment. Importing then working through all those photos is MASSIVELY time consuming. I used to spend a huge amount of time doing it. The import, culling and picking isn't all that bad. It's the working my picks that takes so much time. I'd spend days, all my weekends, processing photos. I just got sick of it. I am sick of it. In part, because working the astro data is 100x more time consuming and complex. I just this weekend finally finished working a Pleiades photo that I originally started gathering data on in SEPTEMBER! It isn't some joke. It isn't a lie. It isn't some pretense to trick people or anything like that. I don't like having to spend countless hours processing photos. I TRULY DO feel that I have to spend EXTRA time processing Canon files than I do Exmor-based files. I do things with Canon files I simply don't have to do with others...like run things through Topaz DeNoise and/or Nik Dfine. I don't have to use any action scripts to clean up other forms of noise that neither of those are good at (such as dealing with color blotchiness in the shadows...I actually use one of my astronomy actions to deblotch, because it is fantastically good at it.) Extra steps, extra work. Time 100, or 300, or 500. And it all just accumulates the more time goes on...I still have a backlog of photos to work.
So, no, sorry. I have no intention of being disingenuous. I'm dead serious.
privatebydesign said:
jrista said:
However that doesn't invalidate how we do things...it's simply different than how you do things. Some people care about minutia...even if their viewers don't see these small differences, we do. Maybe we couldn't just pick out a D800 image from a 5D III image...at least, not until we were sitting in front of a computer working the data. Then I guarantee you the differences would be blatantly obvious to many of us.
I agree, your opinion is no more invalid than mine, or valid. I am about the image, I don't care if it is a Nikon or Canon file, it is about the end use image, if I couldn't get the results I need to pay my bills from seven year old Canon gear I'd buy something else, it is as simple as that.
And this is where we diverge. I care about the image, but I also care about how much effort I have to invest to create the artistic result I want. You say you shot Velvia 50. I know a couple large format photographers who still shot it, and insist it gives them the best results. They love it for it's natural output. They don't work it after the fact. They put the time in up front to get the results they want, and develop. Either they botch the shot, know it on scene, and retake...or it comes out of solution how they want it to look. I spend the time in-camera to get the best data I can...and yet, I still have to invest additional time after the fact, regardless.
I care about the end result, but I also care about the effort to get there.
privatebydesign said:
jrista said:
So, you call us crazy for caring about minutia. I can't help but think someone such as yourself is crazy for caring so much that we care...and constantly reminding us that were crazy because were not like you. Can you not simply leave us be in peace, and let us care about the things that we have decided matter to us?
No, again, that isn't why I called you* crazy (I never said you personally either, you have just taken issue with the comment). I called it crazy that you are criticizing the AF when used in as diametrically opposed case use as it is designed for, I was saying that you regularly demand this and that of Canon, invoking the wildest of claims about their future if they don't deliver this or that feature, then when they do deliver you use it in the most inappropriate series of settings imaginable, that is all.
Why should I care? Well I don't care about you personally, I do care that many of the people that read some of the craziness here actually believe it and think that 5D MkIII's can't be used for prints above, what was it you said? 8"x10", well some people read that and believe it, so I just see myself as a needed counterpoint to much of the deluded hyperbole that rampages through here sometimes. I also disagree with fanboys who make silly claims about Canon capabilities, things like "unique look" etc, but you don't comment on those posts..........
* I would point out I never called you, Jrista, crazy, you just seem to have taken offense like you so often do.
You didn't call me specifically "crazy". However you did make a generalized statement about a particular group of people, of which I am a part:
We, some of you, demand ever more capability in these cameras and they can't fail to evolve into specific genres, then you start pulling them apart even when they are massive upgrades when they don't work outside their focused design brief.
After that statement, you make the proclamation that because we pull apart cameras and figure out all the details of how they work, we're crazy. I like picking cameras apart and finding where they fall apart. I like to know what the limits of my gear are, and understand WHY it is that I have to invest additional time dealing with certain aspects of the data. When I find a fault, I DO demand that the next generation improve. It's how I am. So do many other members on these forums. That isn't dumb, or idiotic, or bad, or stupid or anything like that. It's simply something we like to do, because the details matter to us, and we want things to continually improve.
You make the simple assumption that there can't be any issues with the 7D II AF. What if there is? What if it is a firmware issue that needs to be addressed? You jump right out and accuse the people who are actually using the camera and noticing things about it's performance that they are crazy. You make the assumption that they are misusing the AF system. If there is a problem, how else is it going to be found, reported to Canon, and dealt with unless people test, push the system to limits, and talk about it?
None of us are going around assuming everyone else is an idiot, and proclaiming such. Guys like you, Keith, and a good number of others? Your constantly going around telling everyone who doesn't agree with you, the seasoned craftsman, is crazy for caring about details. What is it going to take to get you guys to just leave us the hell alone? I mean, do you even get it, that we want to be left the friggin hell alone? Or do you prefer to play the role of antagonist, constantly drudging things up and making an issue out of it?
As much as you guys are sick and tired of hearing anyone bring up DR...to be quite honest, were sick and tired of being dragged through the mud buy guys like you every time we say something you don't agree with. I don't pick apart every single post you make. I read a LOT of them, but I ignore most. I know you don't give a crap about my opinion. I don't really give a crap about yours. I'm sick and tired of you guys saying the same things over and over again as well. We could simply be ships passing in the night...but, no...one of you always has to pull out the hot poker and...poke.
