Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/03/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I agree with B.D. (again...OMG) but I'll add this - the cost of digital is in the photographer's time after the shoot. It's in downloading, sorting, converting from RAW, categorizing, etc etc. It takes a while....even with the automated tools that Photoshop offers. I think the cost per final image in terms of time is on a par with doing ALL the darkroom work yourself. And adds to it the overhead of dealing with those digital iamges. I don't keep all my digital images. I've decided that the losers are going on the floor. The OK ones I'm keeping, the winners clearly keeping. The gain in digital is in the learning curve. Leaning a new camera? Shoot a LOT! Hey the electroncs are cheap. It's cheaper than film. But as you shift into production I'd submit that the costs are about the same but more of it is in my TIME than in dollars. Which is okay for me now.In a production shop that increase in time could be expensive. And, of course, the ultimate goal is THINKING and SEEING and attempting to make every image count. But I WILL bracket even more than I have been in the past. Thanks for listening. Adam On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 15:12:28 -0500, B. D. Colen <bdcolen@earthlink.net> wrote: > No, Dave, shooting digital is NOT like using a machine gun - unless YOU > are shooting that way. Shooting with digital is precisely like shooting > with film - except that there's no cost-per-image. Some people shoot > with total abandon, forgetting what photography is all about; some > people shoot as they would with a film camera. If you don't want to have > to deal with terabytes of images, don't shoot them. > > As to needing 4 gigs of ram - I wonder why I'm comfortable with 1? ;-) > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of > drodgers7798@comcast.net > Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 2:59 PM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: [Leica] Changing face of photoraphy > > I was just following a Nikon D2X thread another list. I had the chance > to test drive one yesterday. It is indeed an amazing camera. But..... I > remember when we the LUG included hot debates on whether or not a Lieca > M was worth the price (around $2K at the time). $5K is a lot for a > camera body. > > Lots of discussion on the above mentioned thread about file size, > downloading time, etc. Getting so I can develop a roll of film faster > than I can download files on a large CF card (up to 30 min). Digital > files add up. How can a person even manage terabytes of files? Who would > want to? > > Bigger files demand more computing power. (sorry to state the obvious! > But I just upgraded my system to 4GB of ram and I wonder for how long > that will be adequate.) I sometimes struggle deciding which image to > put effort into from a roll of 36. 3,600 on the same subject is > overwhelming? > > Shooting with film is like shooting with a sniper rifle. I put in a > decent amount of effort before each shot. I usually come close to a > bullseye. Shooting digital is like using a submachine gun. I think I'm > more effective as a sniper. Or maybe I need to spend more time chimping > and deleting. > > DaveR > > > Indeed they do, and sometimes get into problems when they don't pay > > attention to > > the > > details! I for a > > commercial printer, and quite often we point out images that have been > flipped > > where > > letters, numbers > > and other details are obviously wrong! But designers do like to have a > flow to > > their > > visual layout and > > will take liberties. > > > > Here is the image in question from the pottery barn. > > > > http://ww2.potterybarn.com/cat/pip.cfm?src=shpcfurbeddrs%7Crshop%2Fshp > > cfurocc%7C > > rshop% > > 2Fthmafur%7Ccthmnft%7Cnshop%7Crgift%5Cfthm%2Fshpcfur% > > 7Crshop&pkey=cfurbeddrs&gids=p5048 > > > > > > > Often editors prefer a shot reversed. An example is they may want a > > > person "looking into" the center of a magazine rather than out > > > towards the edge of the magazine. Product shot perspective, etc. I > > > think it's an "artsy" thing > > > > > > "Frank F. Farmer" wrote: > > > > > > > I suppose you could. But wouldn't that require and affirmative > effort? > > > > Not the sort of thing that would happen on accident. I'm > > > > asking, I don't know. > > > > > > > > Frank > > > > > > > > On Mar 3, 2005, at 12:03 PM, islaymalt wrote: > > > > > > > > > Couldn't you just flip a digital shot in photoshop? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Leica Users Group. > > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >