forums
new posts
donate
UER Store
events
location db
db map
search
members
faq
terms of service
privacy policy
register
login




UER Forum > Journal Index > Wretch in Beggar's Clothing > "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home." (Viewed 3104 times)
"For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
entry by EatsTooMuchJam 
7/6/2004 4:00 PM

I got back the Ilfochromes. The 8x10's from 35mm and 6x7 all look fantastic. However, they're definitely not that much better than the C-prints I've had made from Frontiers before so I don't know if I'll be ordering any more Ilfochromes in the near future.
The 20x24 print from the 4x5 looked lousy in comparison. The color balance was way more pink than on the transparency and the contrast and detail were much worse than on the 8x10 I'd had made of it. I plan to write Lightroom expressing my displeasure. Instead I brought it in to the local lab where I'd had my 8x10 made and asked them to make it really big. I decided to go with a 24x30 since that would be full frame from a 4x5. They couldn't do a C-print due to the excessive size, but said they could do a high-resolution scan and make an inkjet print with archival properties similar to a standard C-print. I agreed.
I picked it up this morning. Holy crap! It looks really good! I might even say gorgeous. It's also the first time I've actually been able to perceive a reduction in sharpness at the edges of one of my 4x5 images as they do look a little more soft than the center which is insanely crisp. The reduction in sharpness isn't a limitation of 4x5. It's a known limitation of the Kodak Ektar 127/4.7 that is on my Crown Graphic. It's insanely sharp at the center, but a little soft around the edges. I guess I just had to blow something up to 36x its normal size to perceive the softness! The effect is not unpleasant, though, and I'm absolutely thrilled.
I'll be dropping it off at the framing place over lunch today. I'm so excited to enter this in the contest. We'll see if the state fair judges deem it worthy of their little competition!


Modify Entry



Comments: (use Reply to add a comment)
Ben 

Noble Donor


Location: Mojave Desert
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 0 likes




 |  |  | AIM Message
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 1 on 7/7/2004 12:02 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
What is the photo of? Will you enter it in the next UE photo contest, coming soon?




EatsTooMuchJam 


Location: Minneapolis, MN
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 23 likes


Squirty "Stickybuns" von Cherrypants

 |  |  | Add to ICQ | Yahoo! IM | AIM Message | Photography Site
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 2 on 7/7/2004 2:45 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
I doubt I'll enter it in the next UE photo contest.

It's a picture of a huge 50x50 or so room in Alpha. It does look good (to me) at smaller resolutions, but I found it annoying last time that higher-resolution images could not be entered and I'll find it annoying again this time.
Let's face it - at 640x480 my 4x5 transparency is really no better than a nice 1 megapixel digicam.




"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
-Tom Waits
Ben 

Noble Donor


Location: Mojave Desert
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 0 likes




 |  |  | AIM Message
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 3 on 7/7/2004 7:10 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
What resolution would you want it to be at? Without making it a comparison of prints in a gallery somewhere, it is difficult for MF to compete with digital just on the basis of detail.

Would 800x1600 be good enough? 1024x768? Making people scroll horizontally is usually bad in a web photo gallery.

It's not, after all, a contest of the most saleable image.




EatsTooMuchJam 


Location: Minneapolis, MN
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 23 likes


Squirty "Stickybuns" von Cherrypants

 |  |  | Add to ICQ | Yahoo! IM | AIM Message | Photography Site
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 4 on 7/7/2004 7:27 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
No. Of course it isn't most saleable image, but on the other hand, sometimes an image is stronger when it's huge. Other times an image is stronger when it's small. For instance, a picture of a room full of peeling paint would be great when bigger since one could see all of the peeling paint. For a smaller gallery it would probably be better to take some detail shots of the peeling paint as they would be more apt to look like a textured wall otherwise.




"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
-Tom Waits
EatsTooMuchJam 


Location: Minneapolis, MN
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 23 likes


Squirty "Stickybuns" von Cherrypants

 |  |  | Add to ICQ | Yahoo! IM | AIM Message | Photography Site
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 5 on 7/7/2004 7:30 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Oh yeah. And as far as resolution, how about 20,000x16,000? That would be about 4,000 dpi from a 4x5...




"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
-Tom Waits
Macsbug 

Noble Donor


Location: St. Paul, MN
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 1 like


Safety First!

 |  |  | AIM Message
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 6 on 7/8/2004 5:30 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by EatsTooMuchJam
Oh yeah. And as far as resolution, how about 20,000x16,000? That would be about 4,000 dpi from a 4x5...

That might be a tad bit too big for my monitor...

I agree that 640x480 is really not enough, there is no reason why the vast majority of people couldn't fit a 800x600 image onscreen without scrolling, and I don't see any problem with a slightly bigger size either if it means scrolling for some (1024x768).




"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it."
EatsTooMuchJam 


Location: Minneapolis, MN
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 23 likes


Squirty "Stickybuns" von Cherrypants

 |  |  | Add to ICQ | Yahoo! IM | AIM Message | Photography Site
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 7 on 7/8/2004 6:30 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
What, your monitor can't handle 320 megapixels? Sheesh! Time to upgrade!

Obviously my monitor can't fit that either, but most decent graphics programs will size an image to fit the screen and allow zooming. I'm big on zooming in on a part of an image that interests me.




"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
-Tom Waits
Ben 

Noble Donor


Location: Mojave Desert
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 0 likes




 |  |  | AIM Message
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 8 on 7/8/2004 7:01 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
How about the voting gallery be normal with fixed image sizes, for parity, then after the votes are in it adds access to a larger image?




EatsTooMuchJam 


Location: Minneapolis, MN
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 23 likes


Squirty "Stickybuns" von Cherrypants

 |  |  | Add to ICQ | Yahoo! IM | AIM Message | Photography Site
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 9 on 7/8/2004 8:01 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
As I said before, not all images are created to be viewed at the same size. There are plenty of people who show contact prints of their 6x6cm images just as there are plenty of people who like to display them big. If sizes are going to be constrained then it should really be called "A 640x480 UE Photo Contest" or something similar.

For the record, on my laptop's screen a 640x480 image takes up less space than the original 4x5 transparencies used to take some of my pictures.

As I said before, some images are meant to be small. Others are meant to be large. Trying to squish them all into the same format is just silly.




"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
-Tom Waits
Ben 

Noble Donor


Location: Mojave Desert
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 0 likes




 |  |  | AIM Message
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 10 on 7/8/2004 8:42 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Ok. Before said gotcha.




Macsbug 

Noble Donor


Location: St. Paul, MN
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 1 like


Safety First!

 |  |  | AIM Message
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 11 on 7/9/2004 2:18 AM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by EatsTooMuchJam
What, your monitor can't handle 320 megapixels? Sheesh! Time to upgrade!

I know I have been meaning to upgrade - it can only do 300 megapixels. I suppose I could do it on two monitors, but then, in my mind, it really throws off the feng shui of the picture...

Maybe a thumbnail, or smaller version of the entire original, and a zoomed 640x480 (or whatever size) version to show the detail? Not a great (or even very good) solution in my mind, but I don't think most people here would agree on a size bigger then maybe 1024x768 (small monitors, .5 megapixel cameras?), at least I think the larger sizes were voted against last time.




"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it."
EatsTooMuchJam 


Location: Minneapolis, MN
Gender: Male
Total Likes: 23 likes


Squirty "Stickybuns" von Cherrypants

 |  |  | Add to ICQ | Yahoo! IM | AIM Message | Photography Site
Re: "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home."
< Reply # 12 on 7/9/2004 2:46 PM >
Reply with Quote
Posted on Forum: UER Forum
Posted by Macsbug

I know I have been meaning to upgrade - it can only do 300 megapixels. I suppose I could do it on two monitors, but then, in my mind, it really throws off the feng shui of the picture...

Maybe a thumbnail, or smaller version of the entire original, and a zoomed 640x480 (or whatever size) version to show the detail? Not a great (or even very good) solution in my mind, but I don't think most people here would agree on a size bigger then maybe 1024x768 (small monitors, .5 megapixel cameras?), at least I think the larger sizes were voted against last time.


Yes. They were. People are a bunch of whiny babies sometimes. They seem to feel that we all need to be handicapped to level the playing field. Vonnegut would be proud (see: Harrison Bergeron).
How in the world would a thumbnail and a zoomed 640x480 solve the problem? Then I guess I'd be able to see the detail in one small part of the image which the other person chose.

I will just restate the main point. Some photography is meant to be viewed large. Other photography is meant to be viewed small. Some is meant to be viewed in-between. It's not a huge deal. I can just choose images that look good small, but if the point is to present our best images then the constraints are annoying to say the least.




"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
-Tom Waits
UER Forum > Journal Index > Wretch in Beggar's Clothing > "For to buy no more whiskey, I have to go home." (Viewed 3104 times)


Add a poll to this thread



This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private.



All content and images copyright 2002-2021 UER.CA and respective creators. Graphical Design by Crossfire.
To contact webmaster, or click to email with problems or other questions about this site: UER CONTACT
View Terms of Service | View Privacy Policy | Server colocation provided by Beanfield
This page was generated for you in 140 milliseconds. Since June 23, 2002, a total of 660539749 pages have been generated.