We've just uploaded some full-resolution images from the E-620, which we are currently testing. These include images taken with the six Art Filters available on the model.
Matt
We've just uploaded some full-resolution images from the E-620, which we are currently testing. These include images taken with the six Art Filters available on the model.
Matt
Thanks, I surprised myself by liking most of the results taken with the pop-art filter
However I think that the soft focus filter is something that I will use about once only
Roger
That soft focus one isn't bad, actually - as always, it's a case of using it on the right subject. And the pop art is quite interesting.
Hmm yes - I have just spent the evening painting a cupboard and considering what would be a good soft focus image. Probably a dreamy still life or pastoral scene - very hard to do well but it might be worth the effort.That soft focus one isn't bad, actually - as always, it's a case of using it on the right subject.
Only problem is I do not think any of the cameras with art filters are actually available in the UK yet, so I will have to wait.
Roger
Very interesting - thanks Matt. Although I understand the doubts some have about the camera doing pre-set everything for you, I can see art filters catching on and spreading to other brands. Instant satisfaction is the name of the game in today's market and if eye-catching images can be produced without faffing about for ages in PS, this may well appeal to many. Sad in some ways, I know, but it could evolve in a more creative way whereby one could load one's own custom art filters into the camera. That way we would gain the convenience and spontaneity of in-camera art filters while preserving our own individual or unique input into the look of the image.
Rob
I'm still wondering how (if at all) they differ from 'scene modes', which sadly (IMO) already infest pretty much every brand on the market. Perhaps it's obvious if you read the available material, but I haven't done that.I can see art filters catching on and spreading to other brands.
Sadly true and not something to be applauded.Instant satisfaction is the name of the game in today's market
In the main getting the camera to do everything is in the end most dissatisfying. There are few kudos available to the photographer who, when asked how he did it, says 'D'uh, der camera did it all!' Can't quite see Capa or Bailey getting away with that somehow.
Faffing about in Photoshop can be largely avoided by getting the shot right in the camera! it is an old trick a lot of us use.
Hells pensioner - born to be mild
JustMono
Yes, the idea of users being able to create their own filters is certainly what makes sense to me, much in the way that colour options can be modified and shared between cameras. There's certainly a market for this. I have to say although I've had a lot of fun so far using the filters, I'm not sure whether they would be better implemented as a post-production option. Some of them take quite a while to process and, unless I'm mistaken, unless you shoot Raw images you don't get an unadulterated JPEG if you're not happy with the results. It also seems to reorder files so that your unfiltered ones come after the filtered ones. I've only had the camera for a few days so I can't be sure, but first impressions are mixed.Very interesting - thanks Matt. Although I understand the doubts some have about the camera doing pre-set everything for you, I can see art filters catching on and spreading to other brands. Instant satisfaction is the name of the game in today's market and if eye-catching images can be produced without faffing about for ages in PS, this may well appeal to many. Sad in some ways, I know, but it could evolve in a more creative way whereby one could load one's own custom art filters into the camera. That way we would gain the convenience and spontaneity of in-camera art filters while preserving our own individual or unique input into the look of the image.
Whereas scene modes vary aperture, shutter speed etc, the art filters change other factors such as colour, sharpness, vignetting, softness, and overall effect depending on which one you are using. So, the grainy film produces something resembling an ISO 1600 B&W film, while the pinhole effect is closer to Holga style shots, for example.I'm still wondering how (if at all) they differ from 'scene modes', which sadly (IMO) already infest pretty much every brand on the market. Perhaps it's obvious if you read the available material, but I haven't done that. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />I can see art filters catching on and spreading to other brands.
More image samples will follow soon.
And isn't that exactly what Olympus are offering? In fact what's the difference between "instant satisfaction" and "getting it right in camera", apart from the degree of snobbery attached to each statement?Sadly true and not something to be applauded.Instant satisfaction is the name of the game in today's market
In the main getting the camera to do everything is in the end most dissatisfying. There are few kudos available to the photographer who, when asked how he did it, says 'D'uh, der camera did it all!' Can't quite see Capa or Bailey getting away with that somehow.
Faffing about in Photoshop can be largely avoided by getting the shot right in the camera! it is an old trick a lot of us use.
Yeah, I see the difference as fairly clear - scene modes primarily affect image capture, the filters affect processing. Canon's "Picture styles" are similar, but more conventional in that they really only change colour, contrast and sharpening - this is a stage on.Whereas scene modes vary aperture, shutter speed etc, the art filters change other factors such as colour, sharpness, vignetting, softness, and overall effect depending on which one you are using. So, the grainy film produces something resembling an ISO 1600 B&W film, while the pinhole effect is closer to Holga style shots, for example.I'm still wondering how (if at all) they differ from 'scene modes', which sadly (IMO) already infest pretty much every brand on the market. Perhaps it's obvious if you read the available material, but I haven't done that. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />I can see art filters catching on and spreading to other brands.
More image samples will follow soon.
Well, not intended as such (sorry if that was how it was read) but more aimed at the overall satisfaction of knowing that the print on the wall is your own work not the guesstimate of some R&D lab in Tokyo.In fact what's the difference between "instant satisfaction" and "getting it right in camera", apart from the degree of snobbery attached to each statement?
I just want folk to learn photography Nick not take everything for granted. If they do then photography will simply become a fashion fad for the majority - and fads disappear as fast as they arrive.
Hells pensioner - born to be mild
JustMono
I hope you'll have realised from the smiley that I wasn't being entirely serious...
I've a fair degree of sympathy with what you're saying, but OTOH I don't think that anything that actually makes it easier for people to express an artistic vision should be automatically derided. I suspect that these "filters" would actually be of a lot more benefit to an experience photographer who knew how to adjust the aperture, in particular, to modify the effect to meet his/her requirements. If they encourage people to experiment, then I think they can only be a good thing - even if most of the pictures resulting aren't.
As opposed to the old film days when vignete and Cokin special effects filters and Colorver printing was used by Pro's and amatuers alike....welcome to the digital age where you can do it in camera now.Well, not intended as such (sorry if that was how it was read) but more aimed at the overall satisfaction of knowing that the print on the wall is your own work not the guesstimate of some R&D lab in Tokyo.
I just want folk to learn photography Nick not take everything for granted. If they do then photography will simply become a fashion fad for the majority - and fads disappear as fast as they arrive.
Keep on snapping and catch the moment if you can.
Paul
Rarely more than onceCokin special effects filters .............used by Pro's and amatuers alike
As I do with my D2x then?welcome to the digital age where you can do it in camera now.
Hells pensioner - born to be mild
JustMono
As my version of a "grainy art filter" is to buy a grainy film and the right developer I may be speaking out of turn [img]/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img],but I feel this is the way photography is headed, for better or worse. To my mind, the "craft" of photography, as I understood it when I did it at O level, is disappearing to be replaced by technology that doesnt really require any understanding of process to apply-simply a knowledge of which button to press. Whether this is good as it encourages people to experiment depends on them learning from the experience-a prerequisite of which, surely, is understanding what you've done?
As someone who cut his photographic teeth on film, manual cameras and the darkroom many years ago I'd tend to agree with you.As my version of a "grainy art filter" is to buy a grainy film and the right developer I may be speaking out of turn [img]/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img],but I feel this is the way photography is headed, for better or worse. To my mind, the "craft" of photography, as I understood it when I did it at O level, is disappearing to be replaced by technology that doesnt really require any understanding of process to apply-simply a knowledge of which button to press. Whether this is good as it encourages people to experiment depends on them learning from the experience-a prerequisite of which, surely, is understanding what you've done?
But as someone who is not a luddite and loves playing the devils advocate one could say that on that premise that because a person does not understand the engine managment system of his car it makes him a worse driver than someone who does !
Tecnology has always strived to make the end result easier to attain without knowing how (calculators and A levels anyone) and one could argue that in digital imaging technology it leaves the user free to concentrate on the artisic side of the craft without getting bogged down in the mechanics of it.
I've seen some wonderfull imagery from artists that did not have this deep understanding of the mechanics that I would have been proud to have taken and some dull sterile images from photographers that know everything.
I also think that in the case of some of us that had to learn the hardway its a case of sour grapes.
Keep on snapping and catch the moment if you can.
Paul
Also speaking as a non-Luddite (yes, I have digital cameras as well!) I still maintain that to get the best out of ANY technology you should understand what it does; otherwise you are simply groping in the dark after the effect you want
For instance, taking calculators, wasnt there an outcry some years back when it was realised kids at school were using calculators to solve maths problems without actually knowing what happened when they hit +,-,x etc.
To return to my point the art is to visualize the image you want-the craft is knowing how to achieve it. Without the latter your success rate with images is going tobe much lower.
Whereas scene modes vary aperture, shutter speed etc, the art filters change other factors such as colour, sharpness, vignetting, softness, and overall effect depending on which one you are using. So, the grainy film produces something resembling an ISO 1600 B&W film, while the pinhole effect is closer to Holga style shots, for example.I'm still wondering how (if at all) they differ from 'scene modes', which sadly (IMO) already infest pretty much every brand on the market. Perhaps it's obvious if you read the available material, but I haven't done that. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Thanks Matt - I'd still say that's no more or less than a variation of the existing scene mode concept that has been with us for yonks. Colour and sharpness at the very least are already tweaked in various scene modes in compacts and entry-level DSLRs alike. I'll grant that a 'grainy film' look might not be one that has been implemented before, but a glance at the feature list of a typical P&S will show anything up to dozens of these things. In principle they look like exactly the same thing to me - no more than a variation on the existing theme, but with a fancy name to make them look like something new. In other words - nothing to see here, move along.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
