Sounds like an interesting trip, with some good pointers about how to travel (or rather not travel) with camera gear: http://luminous-landscape.com/whatsnew/
Surprising that at about $15K per person, none of the 50 participants took a large format camera, and only one took a film camera. For that kind of money and isolation, I expected to read that people not only took film cameras, but that some of them, at least, took film cameras that could be operated without a battery.
And who would put film in checked luggage?
Sounds like a complete lack of planning for a once in a lifetime trip on all their parts.
From "LL"? You've got to be kidding. If there is any group more film unfriendly, I don't know where it is.
Film unfriendly? On the LL forum there is an entire section dedicated to the wet darkroom... Are we to assume that because you print digitally, you feel the wet darkroom is not a valid "film" discussion topic?Originally Posted by roteague
It's just that LL has posted several very poorly executed comparisons in an attempt to "prove" that digital has higher resolution than film, by using the best digital cameras they can find and the worst scanners they can find.
Be sure to read this part too...
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...7-worked.shtml
Reichmann runs workshops, which is the main emphasis of LL. Considering that many workshops today are tools oriented, and lots of people want to dissect various Adobe software products, it should be obvious why there is a digital equipment emphasis at LL.
Lots of the other people mentioned on that trip write technical books on software, or run their own workshops. These are the digital gurus many amateurs and enthusiasts look up to as experts. In many cases, for many enthusiasts, demistifying the tools gets more attention than trying to run workshops in composition or how to express a creative vision. Lucky for the people running these workshops, the tools change constantly, giving a continual stream of people wanting to learn more; this has created a sustainable photography education industry.
Maybe it is a little surprising that only one film camera made the trip. Electrical devices and cold weather don't always work well together, as evidenced by the brief casualty report at LL. However, I think if the goal was just to go to Antartica and take photos, and not get into software workshops, anyone could do it for less expense through a tour company.
Ciao!
Gordon Moat
A G Studio
Maybe they knew that the pace of the trip would not be conductive of LF photography. Steve Johnson was on board and apparently used his LF camera and Better Light only once. I don't think the conditions were that extreme that you'd expect batteries to fail. Of course, you'd return to the boat all the time too.
And my oh my, so he did, as he says - "7024 frames.... 92 which I consider worth printing and and a dozen which are portfolio / exhibition grade. Three of these are among the best work which I feel that I have ever done."
So his return rate of 12 keepers is rather less than the one good shot a day which I hope to achieve with my 4x5. His annual insurance policy and depreciation must exceed the total cost of my Ebony outfit - still that's progress....
I know, apples and pears, I couldn't have got the wildlife stuff, nor hand-held. I was surprised that only one tripod/head went. This, like a lightmeter is a mission critical item for me.
Baxter
baxterbradford.com
Hello Baxter,
My point was that you didn't have to spend $US 15k to go to Antartica. In fact one could probably take workshops in the US, or attend PhotoShop World, then afterwards pay their own way to Antartica and still have a fair amount of cash left over from $US 15k.
I don't think taping down the shutter button and swinging the camera around counts as taking photos.
Ciao!
Gordon Moat
A G Studio
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks