- This topic is empty.
Who needs 5×4?
-
CianMcLiam wrote:
I can just picture Andy carefully unlocking the bunker door, creeping inside and taking a seat beside Salman Rushdie and friends. Keep a safe distance from the sacred cows and never take them lightly, be warned so that you may walk safely
SteveD wrote:
It was locked for all of about 5 seconds, don’t be so dramatic!
At least we know who’s side the Ayatollah is on-
and which cows are actually sacred-
if metaphors are to be truly mashedj
Hi Steve, I thought you ran to Mammy to hide. Good to see you had the gutts to return.
thefizz wrote:
Hi Steve, I thought you ran to Mammy to hide. Good to see you had the gutts to return.
Pathetic comment.
Is there ANY chance that we could get this back on topic?
The concept of acceptable quality for commercial work is worth discussing further. That is really what this thread is all about.
JB7, Concisely written posts rather than lengthy rap essays would help everyone involved in making straightforward responses. There is just no way that I can address all your points, even if they were all on topic.
Andy
This would seem to be more of an interior design question that a photographic one!
In the case that started all this off I guess it’s a question of what the picture is intended for. In this case it looks like they wanted a print to create some kind of ambience rather than making a statement through displaying a peice of art. In that case it seems that a 6Mb file was able to do the job required.
Personally though, I find images that seemingly decompose as you get near them off putting. It’s about location I guess. Behind a sofa, no one’s going to get that close to it and it’s not realy situated in the line of sight of anyone who’se going to be doing anything, such as checking in/out.
rm wrote:
I guess it’s a question of what the picture is intended for. In this case it looks like they wanted a print to create some kind of ambience rather than making a statement through displaying a peice of art. In that case it seems that a 6Mb file was able to do you job required.
Very true rm. I suspect that this image was chosen more for it’s calming ambience in a busy office. Again it comes back to the job required. This is not an art gallery, although I might argue that even an art gallery might not require pin sharp prints at 2 inches if the picture has something special about it.
Andy
amcinroy wrote:
JB7, Concisely written posts rather than lengthy rap essays would help everyone involved in making straightforward responses.
Andy
What isn’t concise,
and what is off topic,
in the context of producing wall sized prints?If you have difficulty with reading too, that’s not my problem.
I wonder who’s really the over-sensitive one here?
“lengthy rap essays”?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
j
I post with trepidation…
I think Cian has wrapped up this one.
I’ve been working within the manufacturing environment for almost 20 years, the latter half with improvement systems such as TQM & WCM (couldn’t be bothered explaining them, this thread is long enough as it is).
But basically my point is that Quality, as I’ve been dealing with it, is defined as “…the minum requirements to fulfil the needs of the customer”.
Andy, your point is correct in the sense that in this case a 5×4 isn’t needed and the point was made…in this case. The quality, or needs of the customer for something of this size was met with a 6mp image. It may not in other cases as others have stated so quality may not have been met with this format…it’s the customer requirements that matter.
I don’t believe you originally set out to make this a sweeping statement and I understood your opening mail as such. I won’t comment on further, or in particular on more recent replies…life’s too short.
Alan
SteveD wrote:
Fintan I think this thread has come full circle. I didn’t see anything malicious in the original post. Andy didn’t rubbish the 4*5 format, but used its appropriateness for making huge prints as a reference. Any further statements he made, such as the one you are now seeking clarity on, were in response to the rather over-sensitive reaction of some here.
So lets leave it as it is.
As Steve asked, let the thread as is, its going nowhere at the moment.
Some of the reactions to Steve’s moderation above are over the top.
You all know the correct process for discussing moderation of a thread or indeed a moderator and thats not within the thread itself.
If you’re not familiar, please read them.irishwonkafan wrote:
But basically my point is that Quality, as I’ve been dealing with it, is defined as “…the minum requirements to fulfil the needs of the customer”.
Exactly irishwonka. And lets remember that the customer may be just ourselves. It doesn’t necessarily need to relate to commercial business in the way my post was directed.
Andy
SteveD wrote:
thefizz wrote:
Hi Steve, I thought you ran to Mammy to hide. Good to see you had the gutts to return.
Pathetic comment.
I think your handling of this thread and biased view is what is pathetic considering you are supposed to be a moderator.
I’m out of this-
If its a question of validating minimum customer requirements,
well, that’s not about photography, and the only important print is the invoice.There has been no attempt at moderation in this thread,
just someone with a green name wading in on one side,
and, as has been pointed out, taking a sneer at the other.
Therefore, I’m not discussing ‘moderation’.All the emotive accusations don’t bother me,
because anyone who takes the trouble to read the entire thread will find them groundless.
To me, they’re just off topic deflections by people who have their mind made up already.All my opinions, for what they’re worth, are contained in my earlier posts,
and this is the wrong forum to suggest that there may be something better than 6mp
for the purposes of printing large.Obviously.
j
Btw, I thought advertising in signatures was also against the rules?
jb7 wrote:
If its a question of validating minimum customer requirements,
well, that’s not about photography, and the only important print is the invoice.Of course it’s photography.
Professionals are allowed to partake in photography too. And there is also that grey area in between where good semi-pro photographers are selling their creative work as a secondary concern (the first customer being themselves of course).
Andy
I think I’ve mentioned this before but, from my experience in a number of creative endevours, acceptance by your piers and the ‘industry insiders’ you need to impress to get work requires a quality that’s way higher than the actual end user of the product is usually capable of comprehending. Djing, photography, graphic design, there’s usually some professional consesus of what’s considered a quality product and it nearly always exceeds what the client actually needs.
amcinroy wrote:
jb7 wrote:
If its a question of validating minimum customer requirements,
well, that’s not about photography, and the only important print is the invoice.Of course it’s photography.
Professionals are allowed to partake in photography too. And there is also that grey area in between where good semi-pro photographers are selling their creative work as a secondary concern (the first customer being themselves of course).
Andy
It’s not ‘photography’ as ‘artisic endevour’. More ‘photography’ as graphic design or interior decorating I guess :lol:
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
