digital Thanksgiving

I think most people who have ever tried to make a wet process color print
will agree that the digital revolution is the greatest thing to happen to
photographers since the invention of the photographic process. Unless they
are masochists.

To everyone who naively posts a question about whether buying this or that
camera/lens will improve their pictures the answer is usually of course not.
Photographers whose pictures might be improved by purchasing a particular
piece of equipment already know the answer before making the purchase.

The cost of a reasonable quality color printer, a monitor calibrator and
Photoshop Elements is less than the purchase price of a digital SLR.
Mastering these tools will improve the quality of your images zillions of
times more than buying the latest and greatest multipixel wundercamera or
fretting over marginal differences between lens performances in the hands of
less than genius photographers.

The digital revolution allows you to take control of the photographic
process in a way that has never been practical in the past. There has never
been a wet process that allows one to control contrast, tone and saturation
the way digital processes can. Have none of you ever seen movies of the
contortions that Ansel Adams would go through dodging and burning one of his
prints? If you do not take advantage of digital image processing, whether
you use a digital or film camera, you are still stuck in the 100 year old
Kodak paradigm of "you press the shutter, we do the rest." You might as
well be your grandpa because you are still fundamentally making photographs
the same way.

"bmoag" wrote in message
. net...
[... snip totally misinformed opinion...]
if you do not take advantage of digital image processing, whether you use
a digital or film camera, you are still stuck in the 100 year old Kodak
paradigm of "you press the shutter, we do the rest." You might as well be
your grandpa because you are still fundamentally making photographs the
same way.

So what bmoag is saying is, "you don't have to understand what you are doing
because you can sit on your ass for uncountable hours trying to make it up
with Photoshop". bmoag clearly shows that he does not know photography, or
doesn't care that there is one hell of a lot you have to do in the camera
that you cannot make up for in Photoshop.

It is good that clowns like bmoag identify them selves so willingly. Welcome
to the List of Fools, bmoag.

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:58:09 -0600, "Lorem Ipsum"
wrote:


"bmoag" wrote in message
.net...
[... snip totally misinformed opinion...]
if you do not take advantage of digital image processing, whether you use
a digital or film camera, you are still stuck in the 100 year old Kodak
paradigm of "you press the shutter, we do the rest." You might as well be
your grandpa because you are still fundamentally making photographs the
same way.

So what bmoag is saying is, "you don't have to understand what you are doing
because you can sit on your ass for uncountable hours trying to make it up
with Photoshop". bmoag clearly shows that he does not know photography, or
doesn't care that there is one hell of a lot you have to do in the camera
that you cannot make up for in Photoshop.

It is good that clowns like bmoag identify them selves so willingly. Welcome
to the List of Fools, bmoag.

Gee, I didn't read it that way.
I saw this:
Digital gives you far more control over your craft; it's up to you to
learn how to use it.

--
Bill Funk
Replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com

"Bill Funk" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:58:09 -0600, "Lorem Ipsum"
wrote:


"bmoag" wrote in message
.net...
[... snip totally misinformed opinion...]
if you do not take advantage of digital image processing, whether you
use
a digital or film camera, you are still stuck in the 100 year old Kodak
paradigm of "you press the shutter, we do the rest." You might as well
be
your grandpa because you are still fundamentally making photographs the
same way.

So what bmoag is saying is, "you don't have to understand what you are
doing
because you can sit on your ass for uncountable hours trying to make it
up
with Photoshop". bmoag clearly shows that he does not know photography,
or
doesn't care that there is one hell of a lot you have to do in the camera
that you cannot make up for in Photoshop.

It is good that clowns like bmoag identify them selves so willingly.
Welcome
to the List of Fools, bmoag.

Gee, I didn't read it that way.
I saw this:
Digital gives you far more control over your craft; it's up to you to
learn how to use it.

--
Bill Funk
Replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com

That's what I read as well.

"Dirty Harry" wrote in message
news7Thf.620354$oW2.94311@pd7tw1no...

"Bill Funk" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:58:09 -0600, "Lorem Ipsum"
wrote:


"bmoag" wrote in message
.net...
[... snip totally misinformed opinion...]
if you do not take advantage of digital image processing, whether
you
use
a digital or film camera, you are still stuck in the 100 year old
Kodak
paradigm of "you press the shutter, we do the rest." You might as
well
be
your grandpa because you are still fundamentally making photographs
the
same way.

So what bmoag is saying is, "you don't have to understand what you are
doing
because you can sit on your ass for uncountable hours trying to make it
up
with Photoshop". bmoag clearly shows that he does not know photography,
or
doesn't care that there is one hell of a lot you have to do in the
camera
that you cannot make up for in Photoshop.

It is good that clowns like bmoag identify them selves so willingly.
Welcome
to the List of Fools, bmoag.

Gee, I didn't read it that way.
I saw this:
Digital gives you far more control over your craft; it's up to you to
learn how to use it.

--
Bill Funk
Replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com

That's what I read as well.



Ditto! While reading the text, I was thinking it was a refreshing piece. He
is not bitching and gives a good appreciation of what digital photography
represents to many of us. I might also be a fool, but digital photography
mainly gives me a chance to compare different ways of shooting *right away*.
Instead of taking down the number of the photo as well as aperture, etc., I
can rely on the exif and compare each photo to the next and see what's
different (I do this in Bridge, Photoshop CS2). Sometimes, I shoot a few
pics in my backyard, come up to my computer and voilà! I don't have to
"waste" valuable film and wait a few days or a week to see the results.
Lastly, I can take a photo of my project (whatever it is) and send it to
someone for advice or even applause ;-)
My 2 bit, Marcel

Celcius wrote:


Ditto! While reading the text, I was thinking it was a refreshing piece. He
is not bitching and gives a good appreciation of what digital photography
represents to many of us. I might also be a fool, but digital photography
mainly gives me a chance to compare different ways of shooting *right away*.
Instead of taking down the number of the photo as well as aperture, etc., I
can rely on the exif and compare each photo to the next and see what's
different (I do this in Bridge, Photoshop CS2). Sometimes, I shoot a few
pics in my backyard, come up to my computer and voilà! I don't have to
"waste" valuable film and wait a few days or a week to see the results.
Lastly, I can take a photo of my project (whatever it is) and send it to
someone for advice or even applause ;-)
My 2 bit, Marcel




Agreed. In my line of work, I don't have to be technically correct to
have a usable image. The real benefit is the quick turnaround time for
results.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'