20D as movie camera?

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

Well done

It sure didn't do much for me.

All I could think of was the (apparently) finite lifespan of the shutter being
squandered for such a frivolous production.

the sound track is irritating as hell.

Agreed. I've heard better with fingernails on a chalkboard.

sigh
JR

Jim Redelfs wrote:

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:


Well done


It sure didn't do much for me.

All I could think of was the (apparently) finite lifespan of the shutter being
squandered for such a frivolous production.

If you call that frivilous, then you might as well call 99.9% of
hollywood output the same.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Alan Browne wrote:
[]
If you call that frivilous, then you might as well call 99.9% of
hollywood output the same.

I'd agree with that view.

David

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

All I could think of was the (apparently) finite lifespan of the
shutter being squandered for such a frivolous production.

If you call that frivilous, then you might as well call 99.9% of
hollywood output the same.

OK. 99.9% of Hollywood output is frivolous.


JR

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
Jim Redelfs wrote:

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:


Well done


It sure didn't do much for me.

All I could think of was the (apparently) finite lifespan of the shutter
being squandered for such a frivolous production.

If you call that frivilous, then you might as well call 99.9% of hollywood
output the same.



Some do... ;-)

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com