The photography movement exploded in the beginning of the 80’s. The large majority of people bought then a camera in order to experiment and it really did not matter what.

The end of the century brought inside the market a terrible invention that made you and I look helpless how the photographer’s talent became a Cinderella of the trade, and that invention was the digital camera.

With the bad and the good the new digital technology brought with it some technical steps that our parents never could have dreamed when taking on a passion like the photography.

The passing from analog to digital was so abrupt that the classical photography on film crossed almost instantly from present to past. The new photographers, under the accelerated pressure of the new technologies have created and succeeded to impose a very young photography and this is how the notion of digital art became separated from the digital photography.

We have the picture as a symbol image, and the image as a result of an action. Practically in the photography, the image in general became a social instrument, a socialization tool, and the quality became defined by the message and the presence like the ones on the socialization sites and not by what the general exposure to a larger public for the sake of the art impression it would create. And this is how the quality of the photography speech was reduced to visual perception.

Slowly the photography art lost its financial aspect. The paradox is that even if every day more and more pictures are created – everybody takes pictures- the artistic quality dropped.

If we think for a second, most of the pictures are visualized on the screen and from the start the quality settings of the screen take a lot from the quality of the photography.

We do not see the digital picture, but an image surrogate limited to 256 nuances and a limited contrast and luminosity. So …unavoidably it’s not the luminosity, the color, the nuances of the photography message that counts but the shape. So there is no such thing as photography art but random pictures far from being admired and treasured.

The modern photography tends to become strictly figurative, to contain only a sweet story, primitive, not having that strength to become clear and powerful.

It appeals to primal instincts rather than immortal memory and its all about being practical. All of it works against experiment, picturesque resources and everything that makes the photography memorable.

So why are we surprised that the digital art is recognized as such but put aside from the other arts of the world? Aren’t the digital artists, as good and talented as the painters?

They certainly are, but making the photography an art by choice took from it the vision, the purpose and the creativity living ability and a possibility without the sense or purpose of creating a miracle worth to be called exceptional art.

Because in digital photography the art is there where the eyes can capture the extraordinary looking at the frame of a digital second stopped and made immortal in a unique way.

There are hundreds of photographers looking to make a mask immortal and among them I hope to make some room and try my best to capture that extremely right part of the people behind the mask so my photos would capture that extraordinary which makes them unique.

My pictures describe more of a state of mind, a space in time, coloring the memory of the town’s history and tend to capture the sadness of the world we live in rather than the blunt, studied beauty of a porcelain mask.

My Venetian Masks are a collection of the most expressive masks that ever walked in the San Marco Square creating for me that perfect spot to bring into the world more than beauty but with it the feeling of amazement and the smile of a treasure captured in digital framing.

I was looking for the same thing in other large cities. I was tempted to find a central, elevated position, able to capture that part of the people which is able to make them smile or cry, not in reality but because of the way the light crushes on their expressions.

I have succeeded due to a group of young students able to focus their attention on my designing points and make the masks of their real faces compete with the stillness of the Venetian Masks.

I tried my best to use a classical camera but also the digital technique. Last year, for example I used Canon 1 DS and zoom 70-200, but also Sony Alpha 700 with a Fisheye Zeiss. In 2009, I used Nikon D3 and 2, objectives 24-70 and 70-200, all with a 2, 8 luminosity.

The printing technique I use for these amazing photos is the best quality fine art print. Fine art implies by definition color accuracy and a precision execution.

First time I found out about this printing system in Düsseldorf where I studied the esthetics in photography and that helped me to be able to separate the fine art from ordinary photography.

There are different materials you can print photography on in order to offer it value not only through the emotion it generates on sight but also through the stability of the item.

This is how I have reached the conclusion that my images representing Venetian masks would be more suitable for the canvas print transforming photography in a Renaissance painting.

In conclusion, after testing, I printed on professional equipment Epson Stylus 11880 using the Epson, Ultra Chrome Vivid Magenta K3 that offered me the certitude of quality; the support being water resistant matte canvas of 380gr/mp also from Epson. Such a print has a 70 years warranty and it is absolutely fascinating for the eyes.

Looking at it you would say it somehow transcended from the brush of a maestro and that is exactly the reason why I tried so hard to take my creations out of the ordinary and into the masterpiece.

Such a record sensibility allows the increase of the speed in shooting sports movement and with 1/100 instead of 1/10, 1/2000 instead 1/200 the odds of getting outstanding images grows exponentially.

The little time I held it in my hands, sometime between Monday morning and Sunday evening, and with the heavy snowing outside I really can’t say I had enough time to evaluate what it can really do.

The menu has hundreds of pages, a real maze, and the PDF manual disarms you with a length of over 400 pages. I can say for sure it is not light to be carried on the back but it fit my ordinary photographer’s bag that D200 found not roomy enough.

I would have liked to take it to a ball game. Since photographing ball games has been my passion for almost 25 years I could have made the best of the experience to put it at work and exploit those well praised rapid motion captures.

But the heavy snowing made that impossible and my tentativeness of getting special pictures of a sunset among mountains of snow was enthusiastic but nothing more.

The huge sensibility of the sensor gives you a feeling of freedom. 6.400 and 12, 8 K ISO are perfectly ok to use and 3.200 has an exceptional accuracy. In dark places this gets you an amazing exposure. Take for example the subway and the impossible light to take a decent picture. It behaved very good and caught the motion as it should be, clean and exact.

And here it is the apparent contradiction, resolution vs. sensibility.

At the first glance the first seems more important. There are moments when the second is preferable. In a very strong light the larger resolution ensures smoother details.

It can reach into the right light and get you the best or it can have an impossible light and not connect with the right amount of exposure. I have experienced both situations and I understood that for any professional camera there are large sensibilities with unacceptable results.

The large digital cameras like the Nikon DS3 have large captors and as a common ground rule a lot more pixels and a much higher resolution. But they are cameras specialized for newspaper work where the resolution is not that important but the speed and sensibility are an absolute must.

This professional camera will help you take that photo that will be used for print even if the quality is not the highest a photography artist would require. Not all the pictures can be taken at 2 feet; some are ok even at 70 cm. And that is what defines Nikon DS3.