Allowing Lens Availability to Dictate Format Choice

[Corran]

Some years ago at a local LF print sharing event...

[...]it's just a story, noting more, nothing less and does not tell about the entire context of events and all related to what happened at that moment in time.

Yes, I agree with you.

I'm reminded of the audiophiles who insist on the differences between a $10 cable and a $1,000 cable made of unobtanium and pixie-dust. Then when subjected to good double-blind tests, choose the wrong cable 75% of the time.

[Dan Fromm]

As someone who was a professional musician in a couple of orchestras, has three degrees in music, and has been a recording engineer for well over a decade with a lot of experience listening critically to musicians playing classical music: no, they can't.

Bryan, on the one hand I'm with you. While I was working on the published version of my lens diary Emmanuel Bigler asked me for example shots from the lenses. I shot some, showed them to Charlie Barringer, named the lenses used and asked him to match name to shot. He failed completely.

On the other, I'm an amateur cellist who's been around and can't forget one experience. A middle aged friend decided to take up the cello. She bought an instrument and borrowed three bows from the dealer to try out. I visited her while she had them. Her husband asked me what I thought of them. So I picked them up, one at a time, felt their balances, bounced them on my left wrist, ... and then said something to the effect of "Don't buy bow A, you can live with bow B, if you can afford it buy bow C." They then told me that I'd ranked them in ascending price order. I don't think all judgments of musical instruments' quality are entirely subjective.

That said, some modern fiddles are at least as good as the best old Italian ones.

[neil poulsen]

I always found that what the client would pay dictated the choice of format! . . .

I think that it's not just what any client will pay. It's what the client who's willing to pay the most will pay.

[John Kasaian]

This Spring I was catching HUGE big mouth bass with a $12 rod and reel from Walmart and a plastic worm.
If I had a more expensive rod from LL Bean, would I get bites from bigger fish?
I doubt it.
But this has nothing to do with photography

[Corran]

Dan,

When I graduated high school, and was about to enter college as a music major, my parents graciously agreed to purchase me a new instrument. I went to the only store in GA that had real high-end instruments, and I was given the opportunity to try some 20-odd flutes on a table. I was instructed not to look at any of the brands, which didn't really matter because I didn't know any of them anyway since they weren't the garden variety "Yamaha" or other student-level instrument.

Anyway, when it was all said and done I and my mom (who is musically illiterate) both agreed on a flute that narrowly edged out the rest, which ended up being a wildcard thrown in the mix that was way, way over our stated budget and indeed the most expensive instrument on the table. A case was made to "buy once cry once" and the instrument was purchased. I used that instrument all through college and my musical career, only replacing the headjoint with a better one later on (that itself cost 2/3 of the whole flute). So, I get it, but nevertheless at a certain quality level it does become subjective. Comparisons of a $50 pawn-shop violin with 10-year-old strings and a good Strad would be unfair. IIRC, one of my professors told me that every Strad sounds different anyway and they would rather play on their instrument worth 1/100 than most Strads.

[Tin Can]

I was once handed a $1,000,000 Strad not knowing what it was worth.

I held it for a moment then told, I had just had the above value in hand.

Brian, you must have sensed some intrinsic quality in the instrument you played.

I'm a Sea Food expert, when I see food I eat it.

[Dan Fromm]

Randy, the only way to know how a string instrument will play is to play it. Bows are another matter, with them balance and resilience can be evaluated without playing.

[PRJ]

Emperor's clothes I think.

Then throw in a little, or not so little ego.

Format size seems to me to be more about exclusivity these days among other photographers. Same with pickle size in digital cameras, and big trucks. Which isn't to say that if you use a big camera you suffer from those afflictions. People who act negatively to this post though.... No one in the real world really cares what camera you use.

For me the limitation isn't in the lenses, it is in the printing. What the biggest enlarger is that is reasonable and that is 4x5. I had an 8x10 camera for years but barely ever used it. I don't use my 4x5 all that much either because it isn't exactly spontaneous. A 4x5 enlarger is a reasonable sized enlarger. If I ever have the space for an 8x10 enlarger maybe I'll get one. It won't really make that much difference in the photos though.

[Havoc]

In a way it does for me, can't say for others. I like it wide and I'd love to go larger than 4x5. And I'd like to go for calotypes but that means contact prints if I go larger (you cannot even find a 4x5 enlarger around here). But space and available lenses within budget mean I have to stay at 4x5.

[Mark Sawyer]

Agreed. Even on the large format forum, about half the folks think of soft focus as "smear some Vaseline on the lens, or put a stocking over it." But then, I wouldn't be surprised if half the students at a Le Cordon Bleu cooking school ate lunch at Taco Bell...

Similar observation, yet unable to convince more than a few soft focus lens-print folks this is true and very real.
IMO, soft focus, ideal print is contact print.


Bernice