I think someone needs to define "advertising photography" and "product photography" because in my mind they are not the same thing....
JCO -----Original Message----- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 6:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *ist D image quality-_Was -Stupid Question #999 On Oct 14, 2004, at 1:16 AM, William Robb wrote: > > Stenquist probably has a better idea of this than I do, but I bet that > most high end product photography is still being shot on large format > film. > > As far as I've been able to determine, almost all advertising photography is now digital. A lot of the studio work is done with Cambio 4x5s and digital backs. Much of the location shooting is done with Canon 1DS. A few are still shooting with 6 megapixel Nikons. Just the other day the agency I'm working at (Young & Rubicam) brought in a dozen pro reps for a portfolio show. I spoke with three or four (trying to pry loose some low buck assignments for you know who), and asked how many of their guys were shooting film. They all said that their shooters were exclusively digital. A couple mentioned the Cambio and digital back combo for the studio. And I know from experience that many of the field guys have gone with the Canon. In part, because Canon supplied all the top names with cameras even prior to introduction. I know Clint Clemens was shooting with a brace of 1DS a month before it was publicly available. On his location shoots he now carries three or four Canon bodes, a big stack of CF cards, two Mac Powerbooks for on-site processing, and at least two assistants who are competent photographers and expert processors. Paul
