Dont worry, no derision at all from my corner. I've been shooting on Imacons for the past 3 years now, first it was the 3020 and now I've an Ixpress 384, both backs have single, 4 shot and 16 shot capabilities. I have to say that whilst the single shot capture from the Ixpress is fantastic, the 4 shot captures are in a league of their own, truly amazing. There's way more detail, absolutely no noise, no artifacts of any kind and far better colour and tonal range. Virtually 99% of all my work is done in 4 shot captures, I shoot single shot captures solely for people and movement, frequently dropping the people into the 4 shot capture.
I think that for your type of work ( bloody brilliant BTW, well done !!! ) a multishot back would be ideal. You would also find that the captures would need little or no sharpening and no retouching, apart from the subjects own defects of course. I see you have all the necessary equipment so a demo of one of the backs in your own studio is the only way for you to decide yourself. I personally find the 4 shot captures are well worth the extra 10 secs it takes.
This may be of interest to Dick who is suggesting 16 shot captures are a depth of field solution. Firstly IMOP the 16 shot captures I feel are overkill and very rarely worth the hastle, they are huge files to archive ( frequently 750mb + ! ) and would slow up your workflow massively, assuming that there's no movement at all, I think killing everybody in the building prior to taking the shot is probably the only way to ensure this for a 16 pop. I also feel that there still isn't a lens in existence that has sufficient resolution regardless of what anybody says, I've tried them ALL !! So for all those thinking of making the high end Dig leap, your beloved film lenses will NOT be suitable for multishot, especially 16 pop, BUT they will make great paperweights !!!!! Dick, I'm afraid you will find out that when switching high end backs that the back itself is only half the outlay, it really hurts believe me.
I have similar optics to Paul, the Digitars and Rollei Shutters and I also use the DigiFlex for location with some Schneiders and top prime Nikon lenses, but still they are really not up to the task of 16 pop. I guess if you really need the file size they may be ok but I usually just upsize 4 shot capture in FlexColor ( NOT Photoshop !! ).
I await the flames from the Zeiss brigade, bring it on !!!!!!
Barry
On Friday, March 26, 2004, at 06:33 PM, Paul Hartley wrote:
On a different note, I personally, have a problem with the entire concept of
multi exposure backs. I've had the demos but in the time it takes to mess
about doing one shot I'd expect to do several the conventional way and I'm
way too busy to get involved with that kind of work flow.
I shoot jewellery and lots & lots of it. I don't see it as a very elegant
solution to straight raw high resolution capture problem in a busy
environment.
I imagine this will bring a landslide of derision from you guys who have
gone the multi shot route. Each to his own.
I can see that for certain kinds of work it would be fine, but for me it
wouldn't work though I'm always willing to be convinced other wise when the
time comes to replace the current kit.
=============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
