Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Cost of Computer included
From: nathan.wajsman at planet.nl (Nathan Wajsman)
Date: Mon May 30 22:17:53 2005
References: <BEC0F69A.21EF1%telyt@earthlink.net>

Doug,

I would need to upgrade even if I did not use Photoshop. For example, I 
have a laptop with a PIII (7 years old, I think) on which I cannot load 
Windows XP, or even the latest version of Netscape (the latter works, 
but unbearably slowly). The only thing I can use it for is email, and so 
I keep it at my sister's apartment in Poland so I do not need to drag my 
current laptop with me when I go to visit.

Nathan

Doug Herr wrote:

> Nathan, 
> 
> I'm in the middle of a computer upgrade as I type and it's 100% related to
> photography.  I've used and programmed personal computers since 1983 and if
> not for photography I'd still be using a 133MHz Wintel computer.  I have no
> need to upgrade aside from photography.
> 
> Doug Herr
> Birdman of Sacramento
> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
> 
> 
> 
> on 5/30/05 12:22 PM, Nathan Wajsman at nathan.wajsman@planet.nl wrote:
> 
>>Sorry, Doug, but this only makes sense if you assume that the computer
>>is bought specifically because of digital imaging. I have owned PCs
>>since 1985, and have upgraded more or less every 3 years or so, totally
>>unrelated to digital photography. When I started scanning negatives in
>>1998, I just used the computer I had then--no incremental investment
>>besides the scanner (and I still have that scanner). When I started
>>shooting with a DSLR last year, I did not need to make any upgrades to
>>my PC: I already had Photoshop, a printer, and a computer with ample
>>processing power and memory. The only purchase directly related to
>>shooting digital was a card reader costing less than 20 Euro.
> 
>  
> 
>>Your milage may vary, depending on what equipment you start with, but I
>>suspect that most people on this list already have a computer with
>>sufficient power to support digital imaging. Therefore, the cost of the
>>computer is not an incremental cost in the business case for digital
>>imaging.
>>
>>Nathan
>>
>>dnygr wrote:
>>
>>
>>>When adding up the costs of going digital one most certainly has to add in
>>>the cost of the computer and all affiliated expenses and let's not forget 
>>>the
>>>costs of updating the PC, printer and digital camera. It's part of the
>>>overhead. If you can depreciate it on your taxes, it's part of the 
>>>cost--and
>>>that goes for professionals who will depreciate it and amateurs who 
>>>cannot.
>>>
>>>doug nygren 
>>>
>>>
>>>________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>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
> 
> 

-- 
Nathan Wajsman
Almere, The Netherlands

General photography: http://www.nathanfoto.com
Seville photography: http://www.fotosevilla.com
Stock photography: http://www.alamy.com/search-results.asp?qt=wajsman
http://myloupe.com/home/found_photographer.php?photographer=507
Prints for sale: http://www.photodeluge.com



In reply to: Message from telyt at earthlink.net (Doug Herr) ([Leica] Cost of Computer included)