I'm climbing in on this a little late . . .
Good grief, 300 frames in 1.5 hours is a burn rate of 200 frames per hour .
. . a little over 3 per minute and about one frame every every 18
seconds. I've *never* exceeded half that over a longer period and might
have hit as high as 120 fph for a short duration (20-30 minutes). Must
have been one heck of a convention event that could create a burn rate that
high. There was also a considerable amount of back end work.
Over a 6-8 hour event I'll average about 50 fph over the entire
time. Similar to driving long distance, this includes stopping to eat once
and several sandbox visits. Take that time out and it ups the burn rate to
about 60 fph, or about one frame per minute. At events at which it's
likely some portion will burn fast and exceed a single roll non-stop
there's a second rig set up with a new roll loaded; turn on the flash and
run. Often it's set up anyway as a backup. [BTW, I use a burn rate to
plan on how much film I need.] My yield is currently about 2 of 3 frames .
. . and that includes multiple shots of high risk compositions. OTOH, if I
don't have it and know that, I don't push the shutter release and wait,
compose it better, or just let it go.
Not certain I would want to do something of that magnitude with
digital. Seriously. I'd rather have two bodies in flash brackets
preloaded at the start and reload as opportunity permitted. I'm now using
slabs for the flash heads . . . that can run at least 300 frames before
worrying about battery power (given the average shot is about a
half-dump). IMHO there's less back end work with that much film dropped
into the pro lab and working with proofs several days later.
Last but not least, I'm left wondering with such an exceptionally high burn
rate if it was a function of using digital verus film and what your yield
from that stint of 300 frames was. You're the only one who knows the
answer to that. It's just hard for me to imagine anything demanding that
high a burn rate over that long a time period.
-- John Lind
At 06:49 PM 5/1/04, AG-Schnozz wrote:
>I doubt I'd ever shoot another convention type event again with
>film. There's just too much to gain in shooting digital. But
>this is bulk shooting. 300 pictures were taken within an hour
>and a half. But for my personal artwork, film is still
>superior.
>
>And for film shooting, well, the OM is king.
>
>AG-Schnozz
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|