---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: dreammoose <dreammoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 13:51:46 -0700
>I find the problem for TOPE to be one of scale. The WA shots
>would look great as large prints or projected on a large screen
>if they were slides). Ever try taking WA landscapes and then
>looking at 4x6 prints? I sometimes find myself asking "What was I
>trying to take a pictures of?" because the landscape features are
>so small. I find the same problem with WA landscapes on computer
>monitors, with a limit of 640 pixels on the long dimension and a
>file size of about 100k, the beauties of the shot disappear into
>mush. Print the same shot at 11x14 or larger and it can be quite
>effective.
You get a hearty "Amen" from this corner. My TOPE 9 entry, taken
with a modest wide angle lens (28mm), once scanned, JPG'd and
reduced to the requisite dimensions, was such a disappointment on
screen compared to the original transparency, or even the 14x17
print I had made of it, that I almost didn't submit it and had to
have a couple of brews before deciding, "Aw, what the hell, let it
go."
Computer screens are to good photographs what eight-tracks were to
live music. But it's the same situation for everybody, so let's
try to imagine how much better each entry is in "real life."
Walt Wayman
< 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 >
|