Skip to main content

Spick-and-Spin

Image
By
collate
The GX200 is known for producing film-like images with respect to the coarseness and grains. Which of the these images were shot with the GX200? Check out the answer at the bottom of this post.
Two years ago a friend of mine was appalled by the wedding photos the studio photographers did for her. Her first reaction to the photos was like, "Gosh, why do these photos look so coarse? Those of the other batch were cleaner."
What gives? My diagonsis that she had been digitally poisoned was later proved correct. The photographers replied that the two batches had been done separately with a film and a digital camera.
That was two years ago. How much more widely the illness has spread since then? Well, there are some glitters of hope.
Last week, I ran into two teenagers in a cafe. No later had they sat down than I noticed the curious little silver machines on their table. One was a Leica and the other an Olympus. Both were old mechanical 135-format film cameras. They just made me feel itchy in my heart.
Curiosity caused me to move over to have a little chat with them. On my question why they did not use digital cameras, they said that film cameras offered better fun and produced more tasteful images with an unspeakale visual quality on the printouts. Digital cameras are simply not their cup of tea.
Wow, that can make any nostalgic photographers feel hopeful. In Hong Kong, most photo shops do not accept orders for film developing any more. Film cameras are virtually not in sight on the streets or in the shops. The other day I walked past a rag-and-bone's kiosk, alas, I saw a dozen of them! The situation is absolutely irritating to film camera aficionados.
Digital cameras certainly have many advantages and the film era is surely beyond the point of return. But while the imaging sensors become more capable of producing impeccably clean images, can the camera makers give the user an optional function to make the images look grainy like film ones?
While thinking, I played with my GX200, beaming a silly smile to myself that at least this little piece of machine gives out film-like images. I like it.
(Answer: The centre one and the one to its right were not shot with GX200)
Labels:

Comments

Rob Leslie said…
The biggest advantage of film is that it can be sent to the lab for all the work to be done. To get the very best from digital requires a little PP work. As a film user who always did his own darkroom work I like this. I still use a bit of film just for the pleasure of using one of my many old cameras, but digital can easily recreate ANY film like look, as long as you are prepeared to put as much time into it as we used to do when developing a film and making a print.
2 June 2010 at 12:23
Nevin said…
"...as long as you are prepared to put as much time to it," is very well said, Rob. The argument that making the camera instead of the computer programme do the PP work may not hold up to scrutiny. But from the experience of trying/ using several serious compacts, I now tend to think that adding such features like Film Mode to the camera is ready handy. If I wish to devote the time, I can always shot RAWs and do the PP work later. But, surely, no pain no gain. The PP work certainly gives better results.
2 June 2010 at 14:03
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Comrades, Arise!

By
 (Ricoh GR) In their own unique style, the squatting Mainland Chinese tourists have become an eyesore a common sight in the usually narrow walkways around the more busy areas in Hong Kong since the r eturn of Hong Kong's sovereignty to China (Editor-in-chief's note: Officially banned phrase for political incorrectness) Chinese Communist Party resumed sovereignty over the city. Hordes of  the likes are too generous in their estimation of either the width of the sidewalks or the number of people passing by them, so stretching out an array of luggage cases in a disarray fashion for making rearrangement or taking a recess never seems to be too unedifying a bother to them. No location can dampen their determination in doing so, not even if it is right at a shop front, which is a somehow laudable national quality potentially in a positive way. Well, there are always two sides of a coin. Through the artistic eye of a photographer, can't these scenes be reproduc...
2 comments
Read more

Final Verdicts: GF2 in Action

By
(The rest of the GF2 review posts can be found here ) It is widely believed that the GF2 is a paradoxical downward-upgrade version of the GF1. So, after all the discussions of its bells and whistles, how does it perform in reality? First things first. Which or what kind of cameras should we measure the GF2 against for that matter? We believe that potential buyers of the GF2, maybe except for serial fad chasers and the diehard loyalists, are attracted by its smallness in size with a larger sensor to achieve better image quality, especially at ISO 800 or above. However, given the less satisfactory handling with for example just one dial, the GF2 cannot assume the place of a primary camera. Put together, these assumptions suggest that the GF2 is more suited to be used as a backup camera for social and street shots. Let's grill the GF2 on this basis. In the Hand An obvious merit of the GF2 is size. It feels much less bulky in the hand than the GF1 or the NX100, and just lik...
2 comments
Read more

New Low Prices

By
The window shopping some hours ago has almost provoked my AgIDS illness.  Just in case you’re in Hong Kong or are coming here, and have the money to burn (All in HK$/ body only): GX200 = $3,280 GRD2 = $3,380 LX3 = $3,180 G10 = $3,280 Prices are available form a gear shop on the 1st floor of the Mongkok Computer Centre.   Besides these new low prices, I found that Wing Shing Photo (55-57Sai Yeung Choi St., MK Tel: 2396 6886/ 91-95 Fa Yuen St., MK  Tel: 2396 6885) is offering a Sony A700 + Carl Zeiss Lens package for HK$9,980 (hopefully, a bargain will make it some hundreds cheaper).
8 comments
Read more