35mm film photography comeback?

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Cursitor Doom, Apr 5, 2014.

  1. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    "quality" is NEVER a factor for the art of photography.[/QUOTE]

    of course it is. otherwise people would be using cheap crappy cameras
    rather than buying fancy nikon and canons.
    Guest, Apr 14, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  2. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    So now it's "what matters to the user"? As opposed to "the photographer"?[/QUOTE]

    the photographer is the user.
    wrong again, but more importantly, you don't understand its strengths
    and weaknesses.
    it has everything to do with iso, since that's part of what defines
    what aperture and shutter speed to use. change one of the three and you
    need to adjust either or both of the other two.
    wrong on that too.
    Guest, Apr 14, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  3. Cursitor Doom

    Noons Guest

    That is PRECISELY what they are doing.
    Have you checked lately how many images are taken by smartphones?
    Hint: nearly 1000000 times more than by CaNikons.
    And guess what: precious few have any quality concerns. Yet, a great
    many of those photos are quite sensational and there are quite a few
    artists looking into those as a vehicle for their art.
    So much for "digital dslr quality": what really matters is a great many
    other things.
    Noons, Apr 14, 2014
  4. Cursitor Doom

    Noons Guest

    I'll bet anything I've used digital cameras for a LOT longer than you
    have. And for photography, where appropriate and pertinent. And I have
    the images to prove it.

    So, how do you change the aperture and shutter speed AFTER taking the
    raw image, mr expert? And yet, changing the ISO is dirt easy: any raw
    processing software lets you do just that.

    Really? Then why are you arguing, Bret?
    Noons, Apr 14, 2014
  5. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    I'll bet anything I've used digital cameras for a LOT longer than you
    have. And for photography, where appropriate and pertinent. And I have
    the images to prove it.[/QUOTE]

    and you'd lose.
    who said anything about changing them after? and you can't change iso
    afterwards anyway. amplification of what comes off the sensor is *not*
    the same as altering the raw data. anyone who has been using digital
    cameras half as long as you claim to have used them would know this.
    who is bret?

    every post you make you dig yourself a deeper hole.
    Guest, Apr 14, 2014
  6. 15 years is probably longer than he's been *alive*. Doesn't stop him
    having an Opinion on everything going back before Fox-Talbot, though.
    Cursitor Doom, Apr 14, 2014
  7. Cursitor Doom

    John Turco Guest

    Great shot, except that the Lockheed P-38 "Lightning" has its wings
    partially "cut off."

    John Turco, Apr 14, 2014
  8. Cursitor Doom

    Alan Browne Guest

    Nothing says a shot has to include the entire airplane.

    What is criminal is the lack of balance. 6 men outboard of the right
    engine and 5 outboard of the left. Not to mention the barrel behind the
    left external fuel tank. What were they thinking!

    I'm also dismayed to see that the engines have the downgoing blade
    outboard where conventionally you want the downgoing blade inboard to
    reduce yaw when you lose an engine on takeoff or in climb.
    Alan Browne, Apr 14, 2014
  9. Cursitor Doom

    Savageduck Guest

    The idea was to capture the flyers of the squadron not the P-38. That
    is the 9th Fighter Squadron of the 49th Fighter Group, 5th AF.
    So here are the same guys standing, same day, & same clipped P-38 wings.
    < https://db.tt/9J5czSaG >

    Then there is this one of my Dad and two of his pals (all three are in
    the large group shots) taken with a C3 at Gusap, New Guinea.
    < https://db.tt/qjNXQEir >
    Savageduck, Apr 15, 2014
  10. Cursitor Doom

    Savageduck Guest

    I guess they should have shot one of them to get the balance right.
    OK! let's not mention it.
    P-38L had counter rotating props, and it was fired up left engine
    first. As my father said, they could take off straight with feet off
    the rudder pedals as there was no perceptible torque. That was not the
    case with the P-40, P-39, & P-47.
    Savageduck, Apr 15, 2014
  11. Cursitor Doom

    Alan Browne Guest

    The issue is engine failure[1].

    On twins with the props spinning in the same direction, the engine that
    turns inboard blade down is the "critical" engine, because if you lose
    that then the down going blade is outboard on the other engine
    presenting more yaw force (it's not an engine torque issue at this
    point, it's a yaw torque issue):

    In a climb, the downgoing blade provides more thrust (traction) than the
    upgoing blade (need a drawing at this point- in short the aircraft is
    usually pointed at an angle higher than its actual travel - thusly the
    downgoing blade "bites" more air than the upgoing blade).

    So - in the P-38 with the downgoing blade being outboard - in an engine
    failure, the yaw presented would be quite a lot higher than had they
    made the downgoing blades inboard.

    In more modern twins that have the engines spinning in opposite sense,
    the downgoing blade is usually (almost always) the inboard side for that
    reason - otherwise the blue line would be higher or the aft CG limit
    would need to be further ahead in order to have rudder effectiveness (or

    There may be other reasons they preferred this arrangement however with
    the P-38.

    [1] in single engine aircraft there are three major forces affecting
    roll and yaw during and after takeoff. Engine torque, airflow
    impingement and the yaw force of the downgoing blade being greater than
    that of the upgoing blade (during climb). During rotation, there are
    also gyro forces acting at 90° lag that tend to yaw right.

    Often the left wing has a slightly higher angle of attack than the right
    to counter torque and impingement forces in single engine aircraft (most
    Cessna's for example).
    Alan Browne, Apr 15, 2014
  12. Cursitor Doom

    Savageduck Guest

    I understood what you were getting at.
    Did you miss where I said the P-38L had counter rotating props? The
    P-38 props spin in opposite directions.
    With the P-38L both props rotated inwards, and the pilots were trained
    on single engine failure on take off. Simply put this meant feathering
    the failed prop and then adjusting trim.

    My father had an engine failure while on a mission in New Guinea. On
    return to their base after an escort mission they engaged in a target
    of opportunity action, strafing a Japanese depot at Fac Fac on the New
    Guinea East coast. My father made his pass so low that when a dock side
    ware house blew up in his face, an ammunition case blown into the air
    lodged in the right engine radiator & intercooler intakes and he had to
    fly the 290+ miles back to his base of the single engine. He got one of
    his Air Medals for that little exercise. That was a time he was
    thankful he was no longer flying a P-47.

    From the 9th Fighter Squadron history:
    "Until the 8th (July 1944), the missions flown by the squadron were
    very prosaic patrols, but on this date our planes escorted B-25's to
    Fac Fac. Upon completion of the bombing all the flights strafed the
    target with fine results. Lt. H. Xxxx strafed a warehouse which turned
    out to be an ammunition depot. The resultant explosion threw debris to
    a very respectable height. Passing thru all the flying boxes and
    miscellaneous matter fouled up the coolant system of his plane, and Lt.
    Xxxx came home on one engine with his right prop feathered, a distance
    of 290 miles, landing safely. Pieces of ammunition boxes lodged in his
    intercoolers bore mute testimony to the fate of the warehouse. This was
    an example of good minimum altitude strafing."
    Savageduck, Apr 15, 2014
  13. Cursitor Doom

    PeterN Guest

    of course it is. otherwise people would be using cheap crappy cameras
    rather than buying fancy nikon and canons.

    The vast majority of people have those "cheap crappy cameras."
    My daughter used a D70, until I gave my my old D200. She has gotten as
    much as $700 or $750 for her prints. (her share.)
    It ain't the camera, buddy. Oh! I forgot to mention, photography is not
    her profession.
    PeterN, Apr 15, 2014
  14. Cursitor Doom

    PeterN Guest

    the photographer is the user.
    He would be wrong if he wasn't referring to you.
    PeterN, Apr 15, 2014
  15. Cursitor Doom

    PeterN Guest

    A well respected photo lecturer and runner of workshops.
    His work is far from routine.
    PeterN, Apr 15, 2014
  16. Cursitor Doom

    Noons Guest

    Exactly. The time when dslrs were essential for "quality" photography
    is long gone. Any late model smartphone camera can do superb images,
    depending on who is handling it. And don't get me started on mirrorless...
    Noons, Apr 15, 2014
  17. Cursitor Doom

    Noons Guest

    prove it. Hot air comes easy from trolls.

    It's what you've been discussing for over a week.
    Make an effort to stay on subject, troll!

    Oh yes you can, as easy as pie! What you most definitely cannot change
    is the aperture or shutter speed!
    ISO is NOT amplification of what comes off the sensor, you bloody idiot!
    It never was, it never will be!

    That's why I talk about it and prove my points. While you waste space
    with every single breath of yours.

    your alter ego. Look at a mirror.
    That should bring me to the top of the world very soon!
    Careful, I might be behind you!
    Noons, Apr 15, 2014
  18. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    prove it. Hot air comes easy from trolls.[/QUOTE]

    i was using an apple quicktake in the mid-90s, about 20 years ago,
    which predates your claim of 15 years.

    i also used a canon xapshot some years before that, although that
    wasn't technically a 'digital' camera. it was basically a video camera
    that took stills.
    yes it most certainly is and will always be for the foreseeable future.

    there's an amp before the a/d converter, in what is often called an
    analog front end.

    only the very highest isos (commonly called 'extended') are digitally
    multiplied. the rest of the iso settings are amplified *before* being
    converted to digital, in the analog domain.
    Guest, Apr 15, 2014
  19. Cursitor Doom

    Noons Guest

    Funny. Was that a dslr? Oh, OK: it is a "digital camera"... Sort of.
    At least mine was a proper digital, one of the first Coolpix.

    Get some basic education on digital imaging and low-signal analog
    amplification, moron.
    "an amp" is NOT a variable gain amplifier, you blithering idiot!
    You cannot have your "variable ISO" without variable gain amplifiers.
    LEARN what analog amplification involves and how difficult it is to make
    a low noise variable gain low current amplifier before you just blurt
    terms you clearly do NOT understand!

    Yes. And they are NOT VARIABLE-gain amplified, you ignorant!
    Noons, Apr 16, 2014
  20. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    Funny. Was that a dslr? Oh, OK: it is a "digital camera"... Sort of.
    At least mine was a proper digital, one of the first Coolpix.[/QUOTE]

    no sort of about it. the quicktake was a 'proper digital' camera. i
    also had a coolpix too.
    i've already forgotten more than you'll ever know.
    maybe it's difficult for idiots like yourself. fortunately. it's not
    that hard for others:

    A programmable- (or variable-) gain amplifier (PGA or VGA) follows
    the CDS to amplify the signal and better utilize the full dynamic
    range of the A/D converter (ADC). If black-level offset correction is
    not performed ahead of the PGA, the dynamic range of the imaging
    system will suffer. A high-speed ADC converts the conditioned analog
    image signal to the digital domain, allowing for additional
    processing by a digital ASIC.

    Digital cameras convert the light that falls on the image sensor into
    electrical signals for processing. ISO sensitivity is raised by
    amplifying the signal. Doubling ISO sensitivity doubles the
    electrical signal, halving the amount of light that needs to fall on
    the image sensor to achieve optimal exposure.
    they are.
    Guest, Apr 16, 2014
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.