plp@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> I'm still new here, but lo-res is only applicable for digital,
> right? There's no way to print lo-res from film, is there?
In short, scan the proof and print at a reduced rate, perhaps on plain
paper -- which apparently is what this wedding photographer did,
provoking some of the writer's ire.
> Your contract could state that you work on an hourly basis,
> and the results of your work, whether negatives or digital
> images, would be handed to the customer at the end.
In fact, that's what I did when I got married, because I couldn't afford
better. But a _good_ wedding photographer wouldn't have done that
(because they don't have to!). We got shots with wall plugs and light
switches, shadows across faces, flowers "growing" out of people's
heads...things a pro wouldn't have missed. Back then, we couldn't do
anything -- now, since we own the photos, we can scan them and correct
ourselves. But given the choice, I'd rather have had good photos from
the start -- if I'd had the money to pay for them.
< 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 >
|