The workshop was singularly the most powerful set of days. The prep was critical (writing about the goal, theme/ intent,selecting and eliminating photos) to full dive into refining not just the images but selection, title, curating a portfolio through mutual support from the group and superb guidance from Les and Bob to elevate the printed image beyond expectations- for each of us. KSS
I find any iPhone "photograph" falls apart if printed above 7X5. The quality seems to be going in reverse too: recent iPhones rely more and more on computational tricks to mask the still crappy tiny sensors and the fact that you cannot bend the laws of physics with tiny lenses.
I think the "computational photography" thing is the issue. iPhone photos look GREAT at iPhone size and many times far better based on "computational conformity" than those taken on a real camera but it makes them look kind of fake at larger sizes and very brittle in terms of even moderate adjustments. They sort of all look the same to me with some notion of "what well exposed photograph should look like" at small sizes.
You make a number of very good points and I originally wrote a much longer response. So long in fact that I realised I needed to repost your article and write my original post as an intro. Somehow my response posted before I had finished so it had to be deleted. Still learning the mechanics of Substack on my phone.
Your post brought to mind a magazine article by a UK photographer who felt that ‘Sharpness is Overrated’ and a different article by another UK photographer about how he was able to print a very large panoramic from a 12MP camera.
I saw both your responses. There are some tiny-sensor cameras (iPhone, other phones, and many old very small sensor consumer digital cameras) that under the right conditions can produce reasonable enlargements/prints. To summarize my observations regarding these tiny sensor cameras is many just fall apart tonally at larger sizes, all other things like noise, sharpness, detail aside, it's that lack of smooth tonality that seems to be the killer. I have printed MANY 35mm negatives both scanned and wet-print at very large sizes that don't compare to high-quality full-frame digital in the "noise", sharpness, and detail provided by the digital but the tonality holds up from the film which makes all the difference. Example, 35mm TMAX 3200 with golf-ball sized grain and a 4000dpi 16bit scan has fantastic tonality where tiny sensor digital just falls apart even with minimal noise.
Absolutely. It’s all about the almost undefinable ‘quality’ of a picture. Tonality, which gives dimension and definition plays a huge part in this. I look forward to reading more of your posts, both past and future.
You should be tired, Bob. You worked hard. And it was a great workshop. As usual I agree with everything you said but I have to make on point. I was the one with the environmental portfolio but it was not exactly Uber megapixel. It was a diminutive 24 megapixels. In my opinion, the sweet spot between high resolution and good light sensitivity.
The art of photography requires a certain level of craftsmanship in addition to good artistic vision and passion for the work. And being a well renowned (with my friends and students at least) cell phone curmudgeon, the weekend reinforced my view that a real camera with full control of over the final image is essential.
Many thanks to you and Les for a great learning experience and a nice portfolio.
Karin, it was a pleasure guiding you and the other passionate photographers through this Portfolio Development experience. I look forward to invites for your future exhibitions!
My wife and I both have Google Pixel phones. I've printed some of my wife's images from her phone at 13 x 19 and the resolution is just fine. She had a bunch of New Zealand landscapes from a trip and five were printed out. Two of them are hanging in the condo. I have no experience with the iPhone camera and cannot comment about why the image was rejected.
I have had digital Nikons from 12 - 35 mp and all have produced excellent images that can be printed at 13 x 19. One can go larger but resolution, sharpness and detail are also a function of the viewing distance.
Hmmmm... I could say a lot here but... I agree and I like your ummm, sense of humor but... yes another but. If you cannot make pictures in your own back yard ya might wanna try before going on the massive trip.
How true. BTW, how can I get on the list to be notified about your workshops? I am interested in both the print and portfolio workshops. My friends Dick Handshaw and Don Brown attended your print workshop and raved about it.
The workshop was singularly the most powerful set of days. The prep was critical (writing about the goal, theme/ intent,selecting and eliminating photos) to full dive into refining not just the images but selection, title, curating a portfolio through mutual support from the group and superb guidance from Les and Bob to elevate the printed image beyond expectations- for each of us. KSS
Thank you so much Karin!
Please keep us up to date with your endeavors!!!
I find any iPhone "photograph" falls apart if printed above 7X5. The quality seems to be going in reverse too: recent iPhones rely more and more on computational tricks to mask the still crappy tiny sensors and the fact that you cannot bend the laws of physics with tiny lenses.
I was amazed those old slides taken on a semi-fixed focus, auto-exposure, point and shoot from the late '60s held up so well.
I think the "computational photography" thing is the issue. iPhone photos look GREAT at iPhone size and many times far better based on "computational conformity" than those taken on a real camera but it makes them look kind of fake at larger sizes and very brittle in terms of even moderate adjustments. They sort of all look the same to me with some notion of "what well exposed photograph should look like" at small sizes.
You make a number of very good points and I originally wrote a much longer response. So long in fact that I realised I needed to repost your article and write my original post as an intro. Somehow my response posted before I had finished so it had to be deleted. Still learning the mechanics of Substack on my phone.
Your post brought to mind a magazine article by a UK photographer who felt that ‘Sharpness is Overrated’ and a different article by another UK photographer about how he was able to print a very large panoramic from a 12MP camera.
I saw both your responses. There are some tiny-sensor cameras (iPhone, other phones, and many old very small sensor consumer digital cameras) that under the right conditions can produce reasonable enlargements/prints. To summarize my observations regarding these tiny sensor cameras is many just fall apart tonally at larger sizes, all other things like noise, sharpness, detail aside, it's that lack of smooth tonality that seems to be the killer. I have printed MANY 35mm negatives both scanned and wet-print at very large sizes that don't compare to high-quality full-frame digital in the "noise", sharpness, and detail provided by the digital but the tonality holds up from the film which makes all the difference. Example, 35mm TMAX 3200 with golf-ball sized grain and a 4000dpi 16bit scan has fantastic tonality where tiny sensor digital just falls apart even with minimal noise.
Absolutely. It’s all about the almost undefinable ‘quality’ of a picture. Tonality, which gives dimension and definition plays a huge part in this. I look forward to reading more of your posts, both past and future.
You should be tired, Bob. You worked hard. And it was a great workshop. As usual I agree with everything you said but I have to make on point. I was the one with the environmental portfolio but it was not exactly Uber megapixel. It was a diminutive 24 megapixels. In my opinion, the sweet spot between high resolution and good light sensitivity.
The art of photography requires a certain level of craftsmanship in addition to good artistic vision and passion for the work. And being a well renowned (with my friends and students at least) cell phone curmudgeon, the weekend reinforced my view that a real camera with full control of over the final image is essential.
Many thanks to you and Les for a great learning experience and a nice portfolio.
Karin, it was a pleasure guiding you and the other passionate photographers through this Portfolio Development experience. I look forward to invites for your future exhibitions!
My wife and I both have Google Pixel phones. I've printed some of my wife's images from her phone at 13 x 19 and the resolution is just fine. She had a bunch of New Zealand landscapes from a trip and five were printed out. Two of them are hanging in the condo. I have no experience with the iPhone camera and cannot comment about why the image was rejected.
I have had digital Nikons from 12 - 35 mp and all have produced excellent images that can be printed at 13 x 19. One can go larger but resolution, sharpness and detail are also a function of the viewing distance.
hard to go wrong with an image from New Zealand LOL........:-)
Hmmmm... I could say a lot here but... I agree and I like your ummm, sense of humor but... yes another but. If you cannot make pictures in your own back yard ya might wanna try before going on the massive trip.
How true. BTW, how can I get on the list to be notified about your workshops? I am interested in both the print and portfolio workshops. My friends Dick Handshaw and Don Brown attended your print workshop and raved about it.
Eric,
I just sent you a message so that we can discuss privately.
Ps. Dick Handshaw was one of the participants in the Portfolio workshop we just completed.