In which a group of graying eternal amateurs discuss their passions, interests and obsessions, among them: movies, art, politics, evolutionary biology, taxes, writing, computers, these kids these days, and lousy educations.

E-Mail Donald
Demographer, recovering sociologist, and arts buff

E-Mail Fenster
College administrator and arts buff

E-Mail Francis
Architectural historian and arts buff

E-Mail Friedrich
Entrepreneur and arts buff
E-Mail Michael
Media flunky and arts buff


We assume it's OK to quote emailers by name.







Try Advanced Search


  1. Seattle Squeeze: New Urban Living
  2. Checking In
  3. Ben Aronson's Representational Abstractions
  4. Rock is ... Forever?
  5. We Need the Arts: A Sob Story
  6. Form Following (Commercial) Function
  7. Two Humorous Items from the Financial Crisis
  8. Ken Auster of the Kute Kaptions
  9. What Might Representational Painters Paint?
  10. In The Times ...


CultureBlogs
Sasha Castel
AC Douglas
Out of Lascaux
The Ambler
PhilosoBlog
Modern Art Notes
Cranky Professor
Mike Snider on Poetry
Silliman on Poetry
Felix Salmon
Gregdotorg
BookSlut
Polly Frost
Polly and Ray's Forum
Cronaca
Plep
Stumbling Tongue
Brian's Culture Blog
Banana Oil
Scourge of Modernism
Visible Darkness
Seablogger
Thomas Hobbs
Blog Lodge
Leibman Theory
Goliard Dream
Third Level Digression
Here Inside
My Stupid Dog
W.J. Duquette


Politics, Education, and Economics Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
The Corner at National Review
Steve Sailer
Samizdata
Junius
Joanne Jacobs
CalPundit
Natalie Solent
A Libertarian Parent in the Countryside
Rational Parenting
Public Interest.co.uk
Colby Cosh
View from the Right
Pejman Pundit
Spleenville
God of the Machine
One Good Turn
CinderellaBloggerfella
Liberty Log
Daily Pundit
InstaPundit
MindFloss
Catallaxy Files
Greatest Jeneration
Glenn Frazier
Jane Galt
Jim Miller
Limbic Nutrition
Innocents Abroad
Chicago Boyz
James Lileks
Cybrarian at Large
Hello Bloggy!
Setting the World to Rights
Travelling Shoes


Miscellaneous
Redwood Dragon
IMAO
The Invisible Hand
ScrappleFace
Daze Reader
Lynn Sislo
The Fat Guy
Jon Walz

Links


Our Last 50 Referrers







« Public Art--for the Public? | Main | Comments »

October 30, 2002

Free Looks -- high-end digicams

Friedrich --

While digital movie images strain to approximate the quality of traditional film imagery, these days digital still photos have a gleam -- and they're getting denser and tighter by the month. Already, many of the photos you see in magazines, especially those with short schedules, come from digital cameras.

The latest high-end digi-still cameras have 6 million pixels, and take photos so sharp they almost hurt. You can sample what they look like here.

Be prepared for how scarily detailed the facial closeups are. Pretty models, attractively made-up -- and their skin, if you stare at it long enough, looks like Verdun, the morning after. Any more pixels, and the resulting photos will be drilling down past the bumps and follices to the sub-pore level. We'll be looking and staring, and finding ourselves being stared back at by sebaceous glands.

As we move into a world where most imagery is generated digitally, one job-market prediction seems safe: the better makeup artists and lighting designers are going to find their services in urgent demand.

Best,

Michael

posted by Michael at October 30, 2002




Comments

While it isn't quite up in the 6 mega pixel range, Leica's foray into digital camera's has me licking my chops (and of course wishing I had the $1000 it costs).

It's a reportage grade camera, mostly meaning it can take a rapid series of exposures all with a slightly different setting all with one button push. This is nice, as you KNOW you'll get one of them spot on, and of course it takes pictures about as fast as a traditional auto-winder.

Oh and of course it has a hefty Leica body (not flimsy plastic!)

Not meaning to sound like an ad, but yes, the digital stuff is getting quite good!

Posted by: David Mercer on November 4, 2002 2:02 AM



David -- You sound like someone with lots of traditional as well as digital photography experience. How do you find the imagery the two kinds of cameras compares? I love my Nikon 995, for instance, but find the images -- especially facial closeups -- almost cruel. They need some softening in Photoshop to be bearable. Other people tell me similar things. Has this been so for you too?

Thanks for stopping by.

Posted by: Michael on November 7, 2002 9:48 PM






Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:



Remember your info?