Sam
I agree with your idea of the element of surprise. It might sound daft
to say that film gives you the chance to wait ... and then be surprised
at the quality of the composition/light/expression etc..., when you
could see it straight away on a computer screen, but that aspect of
film is pleasurable. Digital gives you a ream of photos in a short
time and is clearly useful for professionals. I am able to resist for
2 main reasons: I cannot afford a gizmo that will depreciate in such a
short time by so much; and I hate electronic viewfinders.
Chris
On 12 May 2004, at 11:12, Sam Shiell wrote:
>
> Hi Guys
>
> Been sitting quietly on the sidelines and haven't contributed for some
> while now so time for a little rant.
>
>
snip
> I know this argument has been done to death but because I have to pay
> for every shot I take I actually think and try to make each shot
> count. Of course I never get there but can live with a (say) 75% hit
> rate. My wife still moans about the house being bursting with prints
> but we enjoy finding forgotten pictures, that are usually of a
> reasonable quality.
>
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
+44 (0)7092 251126
ftog at threeshoes.co.uk
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko
... a nascent photo library.
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"
|