Author Topic: Overheard in Ad Agency offices ? from film to digital (and back?)  (Read 1936 times)

Ed Wenn

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,295
  • Slowly getting back into it. Sometimes.
Aislinn Leggett posted this on Twitter...nice little piece that I think you'll enjoy.

http://marktucker.wordpress.com/2009/01/19/overheard/

Skorj

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,901
  • the black cat
    • Filmwasters.com
Re: Overheard in Ad Agency offices ? from film to digital (and back?)
« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2009, 11:34:28 AM »
How true. I think I posted similar a while back when I asked the photog on fashion shoot here in Tokyo 'why only film'; he laughed at me...


Francois

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,703
Re: Overheard in Ad Agency offices ? from film to digital (and back?)
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2009, 05:35:15 PM »
How true... but here, they don't care about quality (whether it be film or digital) as long as you work for cheap  ???
Francois

Film is the vinyl record of photography.

gregor

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 821
    • gregor jamroski photo
Re: Overheard in Ad Agency offices ? from film to digital (and back?)
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2009, 06:40:21 PM »
The last quote is the most telling of all: how film + the photogs unique appraoch to their camera & subject + what happens in the darkroom really makes a photograph differentiate a client from their competitors.   

My day job is as an Art Director and a product photog using a Hassy w/a leaf system has been the only digital I've used - it was good in this type of project (the shots stood out from other digital shots and the photog was a film person coming to digital only because of client turn around demands).

Everything else I have have shot for clients is film. [edit: one client I had didn't want to pay much so we did use a photog who was using a high end canon digital - what was saved in photog fees cost as much or more in retouching, color correcting, etc...]

It's no wonder why, here in the US at least, some companies have gone with photogs using Holgas and Dianas in shoots  - differentiation!   One of the biggest Design rags, Communication Arts, had a blurb about the LC-A in one of their Photography annuals.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2009, 07:14:54 PM by gregor »

david b

  • Peel Apart
  • ***
  • Posts: 384
    • Stray Light Foto
Re: Overheard in Ad Agency offices ? from film to digital (and back?)
« Reply #4 on: January 25, 2009, 08:39:24 PM »
one client I had didn't want to pay much so we did use a photog who was using a high end canon digital - what was saved in photog fees cost as much or more in retouching, color correcting, etc...

There's one photographer - who shall remain nameless - here in Manchester who charges clients ?40 (about a hundred bucks) to burn a CDR of their images...  And that's the figure I learned about 3 years ago, so it's probably gone up since then!

Ed Wenn

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,295
  • Slowly getting back into it. Sometimes.
Re: Overheard in Ad Agency offices ? from film to digital (and back?)
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2009, 10:43:20 AM »
How true. I think I posted similar a while back when I asked the photog on fashion shoot here in Tokyo 'why only film'; he laughed at me...

Reading the blog post did indeed put me in mind of your post about Tokyo fashion shoot from a few months ago.