[Leica] Re:Bye Bye Mamiya

[dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings)]

On 4/22/06, B. D. Colen <bdcolen@comcast.net> wrote:
> - but there's more to shooting digital than mastering
> Photoshop; it really does require the same kind of emersion all of us at
> some point gave to film when we were learning it.

I agree. In some ways, however, digital forces you to be more
technically inclined than film photography does. Let me explain.

As a film photographer, you don't ever have to go in to the darkroom.
You can outsource all of the lab-side of the work. Sure, you have to
be able to previsualize what is technically possible, but you don't
have to be able to do it yourself as long as you can communicate your
specifications to someone else (and that someone else usually has a
better idea of what would make your negative look goog than you do).

With digital you cannot really do that. For one thing, the sky is the
limit for what is technically possible and it is ultimately more
difficult to communicate what you want done without using the
terminology (photoshop terminology) etc that only comes from being
able to do it yourself. You are forced into a higher degree of
immersion into techniques.

That is not bad, necessarily. But it does limit access to digital for
some people, be it people with a point and shoot or people with a
full-fledged tool (mind you, I use digital a lot).

There are two (possibly 3) reasons I do not embrace digital full-time.

1) I don't work a lot in color (this is the possibly 3rd reason actually)
2) Digital doesn't solve any problems I have
3) I can't remember the original 2nd reason :-)

Basically, I don't need, nor do I want, to use digital.

When I do some snaps to make some bucks, digital is great. One of
these days I'll work more in color, then digital will be fine. For
black and white, it doesn't interest me.

Daniel