At 20:59 1/25/02, Charlie Geilfuss wrote:
The sheer volume of images was overwhelming. The poor bride and family
members are not too happy with having to view images on a computer and
would much rather have a "proof book" to pass around.
My own bias is that the vast majority of images were grab shots taken
with little thought of composition or art.
Thoughts or comments?
In a different thread . . . a while back . . . someone posted a trade
publication quote about how many billions of images were made using digital
over the previous year. The implication was digital is totally
overwhelming film. I don't believe so. Someone else, a while back, in yet
another thread, cited how medium format slows down the entire process of
making a photograph, the result being more care taken with each one.
Now "connect the dots." The cost of making yet one more image is near
zero. The guy in the office next to me says he uses his almost like a
movie camera and tosses well over 950f the images; he perceives it as a
slot machine. Sooner or later he gets a winner by sheer volume. This is
the "brute force and ignorance" method which I suspect will become the
norm, not the exception.
One of my pet "rants" concerns "digital books," especially manuals and
reference material. One of their great failings is inability to easily
move from one section to another widely separated one. Although indices
and hyperlinks are getting better, they're still geared for serial
consumption, page by plodding page (think: computer tape drive and
squential block file management). The bride and her family members are
feeling a similar frustration, exacerbated by the time required to switch
from one image to the next. It is imminently *faster* to thumb through a
book, especially when the user is familiar with it and can look at the edge
and estimate how far through it to start access. Several widely separated
portions can be viewed and compared *much* faster (think: computer disk
drive and random block file management), and it can be passed around a
group more easily. I have little doubt this is a major part of the
bride's, groom's and their families' frustrations.
It's impossible to tell how sharp the image really with digitized images
set up for screen resolution. This makes it impossible to determine if the
photograph is suitable for large enlargement. One of the many reasons I
use transparency and a projector with an excellent lens. I can immediately
tell if a tranny is up to being greatly enlarged. Furthermore, I can also
set several slides of the same subject in adjacent tray slots and switch
between them very rapidly for detail comparison.
Just some random access thoughts . . .
-- John
< 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 >
|