|
|
|
-
Ratty- I've seen you have several versions of this conversation already. Having this conversation is somewhat akin to asking, "would I love my child more if he/she had different color eyes/hair/skin"? Of course not! Your child is who he/she is, lumps, bumps, quirks, buck-teeth, and all. And you wouldn't love them any more or any less if they were different. You might not complain as much about the dentist's bills, but you'll still take them to the dentist every time they need it.
-
We all have doubts, fears, and worries, so what?
Hobbies are about fun, frivolity, and challenging our minds; not practicality.
Bought anything frivolous for the wife lately?
Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO
"The mind that opens to a new idea never returns to its original size." Albert Einstein
-
 Originally Posted by markbarendt
We all have doubts, fears, and worries, so what?
Hobbies are about fun, frivolity, and challenging our minds; not practicality.
Bought anything frivolous for the wife lately?
Heh heh....no I havent. My wife hates when I buy stuff for her. She's terribly thrifty. How she tolerates my spending on photography I'll never know.
]
-
Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera
Ratty- I've seen you have several versions of this conversation already. Having this conversation is somewhat akin to asking, "would I love my child more if he/she had different color eyes/hair/skin"? Of course not! Your child is who he/she is, lumps, bumps, quirks, buck-teeth, and all. And you wouldn't love them any more or any less if they were different. You might not complain as much about the dentist's bills, but you'll still take them to the dentist every time they need it.
I'm not sure if I read you right. The take away lesson I get from your post is, digital is good enough, at least when it comes to family/precious moment shots.
Wrong?
-
Originally Posted by RattyMouse
That's a good point. I spent a LOT of money on Canon ink back in the US when I printed my digital images. I totally forgot about that. I love a print and so print waaay more than most people. An image isnt real until I have it in my hand.
Sorry that I missed the Ethics and Philosophy forum. I never even saw that one before!!!
Hopefully a mod can move my thread.
Done!
-
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
-
Originally Posted by MattKing
If you want to encounter expense, try printing your own digital prints on a high quality digital inkjet printer.
It is also best not to price things out based on $/image, unless you are doing something high volume like school photos or catalogue shots.
Four rolls of 645 negatives or slides would generally give me lots to work with - in the day, that would be at least half of a wedding that I was shooting as the "official" professional photographer.
By the way, I think "Ethics and Philosophy" would be a good forum for this.
Oh, I could tell you plenty about expense. A 61cm tall (or wide) print is presently being prep'd from a Velvia tranny for $250.
And there are 18 more images to go...
I agree with the last point that Ethics and Philosophy would be a better place. But here on APUG, cross-overs and muddles often occur. It's just a forum, and not the end of the world (which sounds like what New York — of all places, is looking at, God forbid...).
.::Garyh
♦
Canon EOS1N ('Brutus', 1993—), TS-E 24mm f3.5L, 20mm f2.8, 17-40 f4L, 70-200 f2.8L
Pentax 67 ('Pentaximus', 2010—) + SMCP 45mm f4, 55mm f4 & 165mm f4LS;
Zero Image 6x9 multi-format pinhole (2008—); Sekonic L758D;
Olympus XA, Nikon Coolpix P7700
"If you're not having fun, then you're not doing it right!"
♦
-
Originally Posted by SuzanneR
Done!
The service here is exceptional 
Matt
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2
-
Originally Posted by RattyMouse
I'm not sure if I read you right. The take away lesson I get from your post is, digital is good enough, at least when it comes to family/precious moment shots.
Wrong?
Taking the shot, regardless of medium, is most important.
Digital is not without its costs. When I switched to film I could pay for, as I remember, about 12,000 film shots a year for what I was paying for digital hardware and software. I don't shoot anywhere near 12,000 shots a year.
Use film, have fun, take pictures of the kids, give them to your wife.
Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO
"The mind that opens to a new idea never returns to its original size." Albert Einstein
-
Originally Posted by markbarendt
Taking the shot, regardless of medium, is most important.
Digital is not without its costs. When I switched to film I could pay for, as I remember, about 12,000 film shots a year for what I was paying for digital hardware and software. I don't shoot anywhere near 12,000 shots a year.
Use film, have fun, take pictures of the kids, give them to your wife.
If I could switch to film exclusively, that would easily cover the costs that I pick up buying/processing film. The problem is, I just cant do that yet, or have not found a way. One of my prime shooting times is when it is dark, out on the street. I routinely use ISO3200 and f/2 or f/1.4 lenses in the digital world. My GA645 certainly does not have ISO3200, nor does it have an F2 lens. I can't shoot outside at night with this camera, without radically changing my habits.
So I often grab my digital gear if I know I'm going to be out late at night shooting. GAS in the digital world is difficult. And in the film too. GAS can be a big problem for me.
-
Originally Posted by SuzanneR
Done!
Thank you!
|
|
Adv Reply
