Hi, Sam.
The argument that digital is more wasteful because it encourages more shooting
really doesn't work, in my opinion.
Digital cameras are equipped with features that enable the user to easily
evaluate and, if appropriate, delete images. Even if the photographer is not
picky or elects not to take the time while shooting to evaluate and hi-grade
images, the computer that ultimately receives the images from the camera is
even better equipped (assuming the presence of decent image editing software)
for evaluating and, as approptiate, deleting images. Only the keepers should be
stored on CD or other permanent medium.
Also note that when one deletes a digital image it's just a matter of
rearranging electrical charges and magnetic patterns in the storage media --
unlike slides, prints and negatives which consume resources and occupy space in
landfills.
One of the nicest things about digital is that you CAN shoot impulsively
without fear of wasting anything except, perhaps, time. Impulsive shooting can
produce great results. Those who must save everything they shoot deprive
themselves of that advantage.
Don't get me wrong. I suppose I have as much trouble as anyone else deciding to
delete an image and I probably keep many more than I should -- both film and
electronic images. Unfortunately, the cost of film and processing has never
been enough to prevent me wasting them.
Scott Whittemore
--------------Original Message-------------
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [OM] An out-of-date comment on Digital
From: "Sam Shiell" <Sam.Shiell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 11:12:01 +0100
>Hi Guys
Been sitting quietly on the sidelines and haven't contributed for some while
now so time for a little rant.
Much as I'd like to dangle my toe in digital my finances prohibit even thinking
about it so I keep happily stress-testing my OM2n
><Rant>
>He told me yesterday that he's already rolled off two and a half thousand
>shots
>(in 4 months) and has bought himself a DVD writer because he's running out of
>room to store CDs. Well, when the hell is he ever going to get to look at 1%
>of
>those?, and you can bet that most of them aren't worth looking at anyway.
>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.
>I'd love to play with an E-1 (or even an E-10 would do!) but as a weak-willed
>overgrown kid I wouldn't be able to resist the temptation to fire away at
>anything. The formula of quantity over quality frightens me too much, so I'd
>rather stick to the old method, which forces some quality control.
></Rant>
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"
|