If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
....Why I like digital
My romanian friend, jeni, 75 years old, bought a digital camera from Lidl,
not like my one, but a lesser, nut still good. I told her to buy an SD card, which she did, 15 euros for a 1 GB Lexar card. She hardly ever believed that she could take 1000 photos before the card would be full, and needed to come to me to burn the contents on a dvd, and then format (or delete) the card and starting afresh again. I even recharged for her the pair of NiMH batteries that came with the camera. 15 euros would hardly suffice for developing two 24 exp. films. , with many pictures of course being bad ones. -- Tzortzakakis Dimitrios major in electrical engineering mechanized infantry reservist hordad AT otenet DOT gr |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
....Why I like digital
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:31:42 -0800 (PST), Pat
wrote in : My son is doing a report on former US President Gerald Ford. So for the first time in a long time I went into my basement archives and pulled out the contact sheets and negatives from when I photographed Ford back in the early 80s. I shot a fully manual camera with a pretty sophisticated flash -- for the time. It was a PR event so we shot a LOT of pictures. I went through something like 15 contact sheets with my son before I realized that there wasn't a single bad exposure in the set. Every one right on and consistent with all of the others. I was shocked. And good, or you've forgotten that you culled them. When shooting film semi-professionally I would typically cull 80%. Switching away from film -- where every exposure counted -- and to a camera with automatic metering has led me to believe that the shear ease of exposures now is contributing to many, many more bad exposures. ... Sure, but also many, many more good exposures -- there are now just more to cull and more to save. -- Best regards, John Navas [PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/] |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
....Why I like digital
"John Navas" wrote in message ... On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:31:42 -0800 (PST), Pat wrote in : My son is doing a report on former US President Gerald Ford. So for the first time in a long time I went into my basement archives and pulled out the contact sheets and negatives from when I photographed Ford back in the early 80s. I shot a fully manual camera with a pretty sophisticated flash -- for the time. It was a PR event so we shot a LOT of pictures. I went through something like 15 contact sheets with my son before I realized that there wasn't a single bad exposure in the set. Every one right on and consistent with all of the others. I was shocked. And good, or you've forgotten that you culled them. When shooting film semi-professionally I would typically cull 80%. Switching away from film -- where every exposure counted -- and to a camera with automatic metering has led me to believe that the shear ease of exposures now is contributing to many, many more bad exposures. ... Sure, but also many, many more good exposures -- there are now just more to cull and more to save. -- Best regards, John Navas And, let's not forget that the "pretty sophisticated" flash system for the day was just starting to use light sensors to automatically set flash output, and the camera was probably a first generation auto-exposure camera. Of course, the justification for going with an innovative flash system and the auto-exposure, back then, was to reduce the number of bad prints due to quickly changing lighting conditions which photographers, especially journalists, couldn't manually adjust for quickly enough.... Take Care, Dudley |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
....Why I like digital
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:31:42 -0800 (PST), Pat
wrote: On Dec 15, 1:14*pm, "Tzortzakakis Dimitrios" wrote: ... Switching away from film -- where every exposure counted -- and to a camera with automatic metering has led me to believe that the shear ease of exposures now is contributing to many, many more bad exposures. I am pretty certain that I have not went through 400 to 500 exposures now without blowing an exposure. I don't know what it all means but I would attribute "bad ones" to shooting film. It means the tools have changed and you have changed to take full advantage of the new tools. Of course I hope you delete all the bad ones as soon as possible. Just because you can take them cheaply and store them cheaply is no excuse for keeping your junk shots that you likely would not have even exposed back in the file days. All that old junk just gets in the way of the keepers and makes finding the right good image all that much more difficult. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Digital Cameras - Argus Quickclix 2185 Digital Camera Qc2185 | Digital | Digital Photography | 0 | January 3rd 08 05:30 AM |
Casio Exilim EX-S100 3 MP Digital digital camera Zoom + 512 MB SD card | Ferrari | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | January 2nd 07 03:49 PM |
Casio Exilim EX-S100 3 MP Digital digital camera Zoom + 512 MB SD card | Ferrari | Digital Point & Shoot Cameras | 0 | January 2nd 07 03:47 PM |
Casio Exilim EX-S100 3 MP Digital digital camera Zoom + 512 MB SD card | Ferrari | Digital Point & Shoot Cameras | 0 | January 2nd 07 03:26 PM |
FS: Canon Digital Rebel XT 8MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 Lens (Black) | [email protected] | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | September 19th 05 07:17 AM |