larger formats being phased out ?

Shelley wrote:

But then, you should have understood what Stacey was
getting at in the post that you objected to.

I should? Stacey said something like "and then I get the WB right."

The whole point I was making it at least to me it seems simple enough to set
a WB preset that fits what I'm shooting to get a good default WB setting in
the RAW converter software. Doing this, so far I've hit the color balance
almost perfect on every shot and do zero color corrections in software.
Using auto WB, you're going to get weird results depending on the ambient
lighting and will -have- to do guestimate WB adjustments in post.

I prefer to do it while I'm shooting and like I said elsewhere, shoot a
sunset at daylight WB and you'll see the reds like they were instead of the
auto WB trying to compensate, shift the default WB blue and then you have
to try to figure out what WB should have been used. You can always move it
around in post if you want to either way, I just like having a constant
baseline that shows what was there. Seems more like film to me this way
rather than the WB moving all over the place in auto mode.

Yes I do understand the "in camera" WB doesn't have a perminate effect on a
RAW image like it does on a jpeg, but it does set the default WB to
something more useable than auto does and will probably save a step in post
on trying to set it right.
--

Stacey

Shelley wrote:

But then, you should have understood what Stacey was
getting at in the post that you objected to.

I should? Stacey said something like "and then I get the WB right."

The whole point I was making it at least to me it seems simple enough to set
a WB preset that fits what I'm shooting to get a good default WB setting in
the RAW converter software. Doing this, so far I've hit the color balance
almost perfect on every shot and do zero color corrections in software.
Using auto WB, you're going to get weird results depending on the ambient
lighting and will -have- to do guestimate WB adjustments in post.

I prefer to do it while I'm shooting and like I said elsewhere, shoot a
sunset at daylight WB and you'll see the reds like they were instead of the
auto WB trying to compensate, shift the default WB blue and then you have
to try to figure out what WB should have been used. You can always move it
around in post if you want to either way, I just like having a constant
baseline that shows what was there. Seems more like film to me this way
rather than the WB moving all over the place in auto mode.

Yes I do understand the "in camera" WB doesn't have a perminate effect on a
RAW image like it does on a jpeg, but it does set the default WB to
something more useable than auto does and will probably save a step in post
on trying to set it right.
--

Stacey

rafe bustin wrote:




Fine. Really. I'm probably just
disconcerted from hearing Stacey
sing the praises of her new E300.
Who knew?


Freaked you out huh? :-)

I'm loving the DOF this thing has in macro shooting, the 50 F2 macro lens is
a killer! :-)
--

Stacey

rafe bustin wrote:




Fine. Really. I'm probably just
disconcerted from hearing Stacey
sing the praises of her new E300.
Who knew?


Freaked you out huh? :-)

I'm loving the DOF this thing has in macro shooting, the 50 F2 macro lens is
a killer! :-)
--

Stacey

I'm probably just
disconcerted from hearing Stacey
sing the praises of her new E300.
Who knew?

Well I can certainly understand that, I'm in a state of shock myself. Who
could possibly have predicted it would be Stacey participating in a digital
camera thread and telling us what a hassle film is.

"rafe bustin" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 04:05:35 GMT, "Shelley" wrote:

But then, you should have understood what Stacey was
getting at in the post that you objected to.

I should? Stacey said something like "and then I get the WB right." From
that I was supposed to know he or she was talking about preset white
point
adjustments as opposed to using the various in-camera white balance
adjustments? But regardless of whether I should or shouldn't have known
that, I certainly wasn't "objecting" to Stacey's statement. I believe he
or
she only recently acquired his or her digital camera and I thought he or
she
perhaps didn't know about the effect of the in-camera white balance
adjustments in RAW mode.


Fine. Really. I'm probably just
disconcerted from hearing Stacey
sing the praises of her new E300.
Who knew?


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

In article dNyEd.11638$lG.3095@trnddc03,
"Shelley" wrote:

I'm probably just
disconcerted from hearing Stacey
sing the praises of her new E300.
Who knew?

Well I can certainly understand that, I'm in a state of shock myself. Who
could possibly have predicted it would be Stacey participating in a digital
camera thread and telling us what a hassle film is.

Are you sure its not an impostor?

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

In article dNyEd.11638$lG.3095@trnddc03,
"Shelley" wrote:

I'm probably just
disconcerted from hearing Stacey
sing the praises of her new E300.
Who knew?

Well I can certainly understand that, I'm in a state of shock myself. Who
could possibly have predicted it would be Stacey participating in a digital
camera thread and telling us what a hassle film is.

Are you sure its not an impostor?

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

Is it true that medium and large format films
will be the first to go and that 35mm will continue
long after they have gone?
Thanks
AL


I could argue this one either way.

Pro: 35 mm has a huge installed base,
and is used in disposable film cameras
as well. Lots more of it in the market
than MF or LF film. On that basis, it
will live forever.

Con: Digital capture will replace 35 mm
well before it replaces MF or LF. Lots
of 35 mm SLRs and even nice Point & Shoot
cameras are probably being quietly retired
these days.


IIRC, still photography is actually a very small portion of the film using
market. One hollywood movie camera can use more film footage a day than a
busy wedding photog does in a year. then you have scientific and medical
usage.

if I need more quality, I'll use my 4X5

And how much longer until it will need to
be 8x10 and the 4x5 gear goes on ebay??