I agree with the point about the speed of digital and losing the whole
point of taking photographs in the first place.
When I climbed 5000' to the top of Scotchman Peak (in northen Idaho) I
discovered a really frindly critter. I sat for quite a while to get
this one: http://www.geocities.com/conradvogel/pics/lo-scotch-goat2.jpg
but it was fun watching the "subject".
I'm far from a professional photographer, but sitting on the hill and
enjoying it in slow motion was pretty satisfying.
It started raining on me when I was at about 3700', but I was too far to
turn back.....
Corey V.
Humans [in general] value most that which has the greatest difficulty
to achieve. Someone mentioned a while back cited a factoid about the
number of digital images made during the past year or so. I daresay
the ease, cost and speed with which someone can do this with a digital
is only surpassed by using a digital video camera camera. The only
limit is the number of images that can be stored before running out of
memory cards. IMHO the total number of times a camera holder presses
a shutter release is not meaningful; it considers nothing about the
yield rate. The following "objective function" is meaningful:
(Burn Rate) X (Yield Rate) X (Time Spent Making Photographs) =
(Total Yield)
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|
