Not meaning to pick on Brian, but "digital doesn't cut the mustard for
landscapes" is, well, hooey. More accurately, perhaps, the E-3 doesn't cut it.
Or maybe the operator isn't familiar enough with his equipment. Or tried to
push it too far. Who knows?
I spent Saturday at the annual Gallery opening at John Paul Caponigro's. First
display of prints from his third trip to Antarctica. Let me tell you something
from the bottom of my heart: Digital cuts the mustard. It cuts the jar the
mustard came in. It cuts the truck that delivered the jars of mustard.
Frankly, this whole digital v. film argument gives me indigestion, and I intend
to stop reading them. Both are good. Both have strengths, both have weaknesses.
Digital is here to stay. Film will be around for a long, long time. Let us get
over ourselves and concentrate on images.
Images are all that matters.
My 2 cents, as always, worth what you paid for it.
--Bob Whitmire
www.bwp33.com
---- Brian Swale <bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Sorry this is so late ...
>
> Here's an example of why I think digital doesn't cut the mustard for
> landscapes. The top two links at
> http://www.brianswale.com/zuikoholics/index.htm
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|