Subject: | Re: [OM] When Digital... |
---|---|
From: | Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Sat, 17 Jul 2010 20:02:17 -0500 |
> Should all be taken care of with one 36 exposure roll of film. What I don't > understand is the need to fire off 240 frames and all the fuss and muss of > flash to hit just a couple of winners. Because I could? (also, it takes a good 100 pictures to get past the dorky smiles, boring poses and bad technique). AG -- _________________________________________________________________ Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/ Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/ |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [OM] IMG: Nathan's PAW 27: just a slow week, John Hudson |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [OM] When Digital..., Wayne Harridge |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [OM] When Digital..., John Hudson |
Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] When Digital..., Wayne Harridge |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |