Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]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