Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Shel - I am joining the discussion late as I am just back from a 4-day holiday trip down to Eureka Springs. I shot about 500 images with my ist-D. Meg added 8-10 with the Optio. If that were slide film, I would have paid for one of my two 512mB cards. In the month or so I have had the ist-D, I have about paid for both cards in saved film purchase and processing. Over the next few days I will give some of that back as I select the two or three handfuls I will have printed to take with me to the family Christmas gathering. I have no doubt that in the long run I will come out ahead ussing digital rather than film. stan on 11/27/03 2:48 PM, Shel Belinkoff at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How much film could you buy for the cost of a given memory card? IOW, at what point does the card start paying for itself? And how many cards do people have? Bruce Dayton wrote: Hope this is making sense. In a nutshell, the ability to shoot without the concern of cost. Another example - My wife is quite cognizant of the cost per frame on her 35mm camera. I believe it to be about .50 each (film/develop/print). So she would mentally count the cost as she shot. Opting many times not to take/try a shot because she didn't want to pay for it. Now with her little Optio S, she will go out and freely shoot whatever takes her fancy. She may shoot about 90 frames of which later she wants 5-10 printed. Others she may not print but still want to keep, just in case.
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
How do we know his wasn't a shotgun wedding? VBSEG Len * There's no place like 127.0.0.1 -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 9:37 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Ok, now that is just too sweet - are you sure you're on the right list? tan.x. (who hopes her husband says the same thing after 20 years of putting up with her bs) - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 11:38 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale - Original Message - From: Tanya Mayer Photography Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale lol! so I take it that you're not married then William? Twenty wonderful years so far, and I love her more now than I did when I married her. William Robb
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
- Original Message - From: Cotty Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale On 28/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: lol! so I take it that you're not married then William? Twenty wonderful years so far, and I love her more now than I did when I married her. Still got the shotgun Bill? They don't allow me to have a gun. Telle est la vie WW
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Tom, your website is fantastic! Your work is beautiful! Very contemporary and classic... To answer your question - QLD is short for Queensland, the sunny state that I live in in Australia. You know NY is to New York... lol. Also, I have never seen a proof magazine offered at any of the Australian labs that I deal with however I can see how it would work, and I think that most people would love to have them like that to keep. Might look into it further. Thanks for the food for thought. tan.x. - Original Message - From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 1:33 PM Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] My main stumbling block is the fact that I am in the country and country people tend to like things on paper. Most turn their nose up in disgust at the idea of photographs being on a cd-rom. (OTOH, all of my Brisbane clients are pretty much requesting JUST to have everything on CD!) Only approx. 70% of the population even have computers, with waaay less having internet or email capabilities. Currently, I sell my portrait/wedding packages on a per roll basis, with all proofs being usable 5x7s that the client gets to keep. I have a personal aversion to daylight robbery, and find that this way gives my clients the best value for their money. Interesting way to put it. So how do you guys who are shooting digital go about it? That's, uh, kind of a broad question I mean, alot of my clients won't be able to access my web galleries or even have their proofs emailed to them. Many of them live way out of town and would probably be extremely intimidated if a cd arrived in the mail. The cost of having digital files printed in QLD still exceeds even 5x7 inch film proofs... What's QLD? I don't do paper proofs anymore, but if someone really wants them, they can buy them. Another option is a proof magazine. It's a stack 10x15's with 6 images per page spiral bound. tv -- Thomas Van Veen Photography www.thomasvanveen.com 301-758-3085
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
-Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tom, your website is fantastic! Your work is beautiful! Very contemporary and classic... Thanks. To answer your question - QLD is short for Queensland, the sunny state that I live in in Australia. You know NY is to New York... lol. Ah. I thought it was some print process I hadn't heard of. Also, I have never seen a proof magazine offered at any of the Australian labs that I deal with however I can see how it would work, and I think that most people would love to have them like that to keep. Well, if you go digital, I would recommend you just offer digital proofing as your standard process. If they balk, offer the proof mag, or regular proofs for an extra fee. My print sales have gone up about 30%. Also, I usually get anywhere from 100 to 1000 hits to the each online proof set. You can't beat the advertising. As to the highway robbery reference...you aren't holding a gun to your prospect's heads. They know your pricing before they hire you, and they hire you because they think you're worth it. Higher fees are ok if you can get them - it means more money or less work, neither of which is a bad thing. This is a business after all... tv -- Thomas Van Veen Photography www.thomasvanveen.com 301-758-3085
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
it seems the ones that shoot the least complain the most. Herb - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 12:42 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Sheesh, Herb, everyone has different points of reference. To some you may be a rank amateur that practices far too little and couldn't make a quality print if you sold your soul to the devil.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it seems the ones that shoot the least complain the most. Ooh, *there's* one for my collection of PDML quotations! -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
- Original Message - From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 5:43 PM Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale Well, if you go digital, I would recommend you just offer digital proofing as your standard process. If they balk, offer the proof mag, or regular proofs for an extra fee. Actually, I have been considering doing this even with film - just getting the negs processed and offering the scans on cd as proofs. Not sure that it will always work around here though - as I said not everyone has computers, and even less have internet access. As to the highway robbery reference...you aren't holding a gun to your prospect's heads. They know your pricing before they hire you, and they hire you because they think you're worth it. Higher fees are ok if you can get them - it means more money or less work, neither of which is a bad thing. This is a business after all... Yep, and that's why I am travelling to Brisbane so frequently (14 hour drive or 2 hour flight), as down there people are much more willing to pay me decent money. I think that here in my home town, people don't value my work as much due to me being a local, but it seems that the further away people are, the more they appreciate what I do! -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tom, your website is fantastic! Your work is beautiful! Very contemporary and classic... Thanks. To answer your question - QLD is short for Queensland, the sunny state that I live in in Australia. You know NY is to New York... lol. Ah. I thought it was some print process I hadn't heard of. Also, I have never seen a proof magazine offered at any of the Australian labs that I deal with however I can see how it would work, and I think that most people would love to have them like that to keep. Well, if you go digital, I would recommend you just offer digital proofing as your standard process. If they balk, offer the proof mag, or regular proofs for an extra fee. My print sales have gone up about 30%. Also, I usually get anywhere from 100 to 1000 hits to the each online proof set. You can't beat the advertising. As to the highway robbery reference...you aren't holding a gun to your prospect's heads. They know your pricing before they hire you, and they hire you because they think you're worth it. Higher fees are ok if you can get them - it means more money or less work, neither of which is a bad thing. This is a business after all... tv -- Thomas Van Veen Photography www.thomasvanveen.com 301-758-3085
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Tanya, I think tha fact that you were obviously serious about photography despite being out in the middle of nowhere was more important to us than your being a girl. 'Sides can a married woman with children be considered a girl (grin)? --- Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Hi there Frank, Lovely to make your acquaintance! lol. I hear you on the tongue in cheek thing, and have learnt in the past that it pays to have a very open mind and a good sense of humour when using these lists! Flame wars are very entertaining to watch, but I generally don't participate. hehe. As for my being popular - I think it has more to do with me, at that time, being a true rose amongst the thorns - I think there was only one other lady on list when I was around previously, and she wasn't a very regular poster. So being a 24 year old girl, kind of helped my notoriety a bit. Mind you, I do remember thinking that Shel was a girl for a bit there too! (Thinking that Shel was short for Michelle). Stood corrected (and very embarrassed!)when Stan emailed me a pic of him though! lol! It's lovely to see now that there are a few ladies here though - I feel much more at home! ;-) Sorry, totally off topic guys, better get back to the subject at hand, or I'll be making enemies already! tan.x. - Original Message - From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 9:47 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Well, now that you mention it, I ~was~ wondering about that Photographic Artist bit... vbg BTW, hi. I've been active on the list for several years now, but I faintly recall that you may have been around, perhaps during my lurlking days, or possibly when I first started posting. In any event we certainly didn't get to know each other at all. You'll very quickly realize (if you haven't already) that much of what I say is tongue in cheek, and pretty much always to be taken worth a grain of salt. The odd salient point accidently slips through from time to time, but I'm working on keeping those to a minimum. (Hey, that's two salt metaphors in successive sentences. Not bad, eh?) So, pleased to meet you. It seems from some of the other welcomes that I've read that you were quite popular poster in your day g. Everyone seems quite happy to have you back. cheers, frank Rider of Bicycles The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 08:42:24 +1000 OT- my apologies to you all - I just noticed that all of my posts are showing Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist. In this context, it looks extremely pompous and conceited! lol. I subscribed to the list using my work email addy, and forgot that that is the display I have for it! Sorry guys, really, I am not totally full of myself... I promise *hides head sheepishly*... ;-) tan.x. - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 7:51 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Hi, Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Also, my nearest photolab is 3 hours away and currently I send EVERYTHING away, which to a very impatient woman, is an absolute nightmare. Digital, in this instance, would be absolute bliss. Why do you not process your own? At the most, £200 for a Jobo processor and tanks to process up to five at a time. £15 to process 10 C-41 36exp films. Probably cheaper if you are buying inquantity and tax deductible. Or you could go the whole hog and buy one of the Jobo ATL series autoprocessors. If you go digital you will, in your situation, be spending more, not less time in front of a screen and you will need to invest in a high-end printer (or digital minilab) to create the output. mike _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
i've been getting the distinct feeling for the past couple of months, the ones that are shooting are the ones talking about shooting and photography, and the ones that aren't, are talking about everything else. one thing i notice about the last couple of weeks with my *istD. my total frame rate is about the same as before, but i am getting about twice as many shots that i can put into my stock collection. freedom from having to bracket and not worrying about film costs makes the difference. Herb - Original Message - From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 7:27 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it seems the ones that shoot the least complain the most. Ooh, *there's* one for my collection of PDML quotations!
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Some of us have been into photography for a long long time, Herb. After 50 years or so you don't need to practice a lot. The interesting thing about these discussions is that most of us do not mention our specific needs when making comments about digital. TV would lose sales in the market he is in if he was not doing digital. He has little choice in the matter. Me, I am out of the market, do a little bit personal photography, have a very limited income, and therefore digital makes no economic sense at all. You sound like you are somewhere in the middle and spending on a digital camera is no problem for you, so it is a case of liking you new toys. For someone like TV, not going digital is economic suicide. For someone like you it is a personal decision. For someone like me it is nearly an impossibility beyond a low-end PS. Like most economic decisions, what you should do depends upon your needs, means, and desires. It really has little to do with which is better. -- Herb Chong wrote: the vast majority aren't people on this list. one of the reasons for being here is that the members say that they take their photography seriously, yet, i hear people on this list struggle to get up to a few hundred photos a year. they argue and moan over the digital wave overtaking us. they say they take take their photography seriously, but they don't seem to. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
despite your financial conditions, you still shoot as much as you can. also, you could still use more practice. it takes only a few months to lose the edge. Herb... - Original Message - From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 11:37 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Some of us have been into photography for a long long time, Herb. After 50 years or so you don't need to practice a lot. The interesting thing about these discussions is that most of us do not mention our specific needs when making comments about digital. TV would lose sales in the market he is in if he was not doing digital. He has little choice in the matter. Me, I am out of the market, do a little bit personal photography, have a very limited income, and therefore digital makes no economic sense at all. You sound like you are somewhere in the middle and spending on a digital camera is no problem for you, so it is a case of liking you new toys.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
On 28/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: i've been getting the distinct feeling for the past couple of months, the ones that are shooting are the ones talking about shooting and photography, and the ones that aren't, are talking about everything else. That's us sorted then Frank! I wish I was as good at determining everyone's capabilities over email... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Hi Tanya, Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Hi there Mike! Many thanks for your suggestions. The primary reasons I have never taken to processing my own films are aged 12 mths, 4 and 6. Almosy everyone else seems to disagree with me, too. Nothing new there. I understand your reasons and agree with you, although it is possible to deal with most of the problems. My reason for suggesting that you take control of the whole process was that you are far away from support (whoop whoop?) and that doing so would relieve you of the requirement for much travel. Some of the digitalista seem to have not quite grabbed this fact Have just had a guy really pushing for me to use his lab, by offering really cheap roll scans (18mb files and using Digital ICE) with processing. This all sounds great to me, as it is less scanning for me and I am forever fighting with my scanner to keep it dust/finger print free. Looks like the ideal solution, once you get him to do things the way _you_ want them. mike
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Some of us have been into photography for a long long time. After 50 years or so you don't need to practice a lot. After only 48 years I find that I've still got things to learn, even in the areas where I consider myself reasonably competent.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
- Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Some of us have been into photography for a long long time. After 50 years or so you don't need to practice a lot. After only 48 years I find that I've still got things to learn, even in the areas where I consider myself reasonably competent. I can hardly wait to take my large format out after a couple of years of disuse and see if I can still set it up... William Robb
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
William Robb wrote: I can hardly wait to take my large format out after a couple of years of disuse and see if I can still set it up... That's your bio. taken care of, then. Myself, I have the visage and physique of a Greek God, PhD's from two separate universities and I'm still only 18. mike
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i've been getting the distinct feeling for the past couple of months, the ones that are shooting are the ones talking about shooting and photography, and the ones that aren't, are talking about everything else. You ain't seen nuthin! Head over to the rec.photo newsgroups to see this phenomenon in full force! -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
- Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale William Robb wrote: I can hardly wait to take my large format out after a couple of years of disuse and see if I can still set it up... That's your bio. taken care of, then. Myself, I have the visage and physique of a Greek God, PhD's from two separate universities and I'm still only 18. I said set it up, not get it up. I use that equipment with alarming frequency. William Robb
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Herb Chong wrote: i've been getting the distinct feeling for the past couple of months, the ones that are shooting are the ones talking about shooting and photography, and the ones that aren't, are talking about everything else. And, somehow, you manage to do a lot of both! keith whaley
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Of course you do, John. That is obvious to us here on the list. Yep. It's obvious that several other people could have a lot to learn, too, if only they were smart enough to recognise the fact. As a recent study underlined, the last people to recognise their own shortcomings are the truly incompetent. John Francis wrote: After only 48 years I find that I've still got things to learn, even in the areas where I consider myself reasonably competent. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
- Original Message - From: Tanya Mayer Photography Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale lol! so I take it that you're not married then William? Twenty wonderful years so far, and I love her more now than I did when I married her. William Robb
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
I disagree. Film will die in 35mm and medium format because digital will soon be better. I see it just like what happened to the home movie market in the 70's. video cameras quickly killed them and you dont see too many people shooting super-8 film now do you? Those cameras and projectors are essentially worthless now. JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 12:21 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale I think the whole digital thing has to be put in perspective. It IS taking off. People are trading in their film cameras to get money to buy digital cameras because they must have the LATEST AND GREATEST thing. There are thousands of used film cameras coming in to camera stores and not too many buyers. The potential buyers (like many of us) are thinking to ourselves that we might want the ist-D so we are not going to buy the LX going for a good price or the MX going for a song. That pushes the prices down even more. Camera companies and film cameras are sending out signals that their focus is shifting. People panic. Trade in more film cameras for digital. Prices keep going down. (Sounds like the Stock market a few years ago. Actually it sounds like the burst of the high tech bubble in the markets.) My prediction: Things will eventually quiet down. Digital will be a strong influence in our society and one that will continue to grow. Film will still be around and co-exist with digital for many many years. Eventually film cameras will start to increase in price and then everyone will want them. It's just one big cycle. I'll bet alot of the photographers who went digital were also among the first to sell their mutual funds when things turned bad. Just my 2 cents Vic
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
I agree that the impact is and will be large. I just don't see film or film cameras going away completely. My point about the consumer is this... Our office consists of 25 people. Our company owns 3 digital cameras for taking and sending pictures of well locations, equipment. Of the 25 people all have film cameras, only 3 have digital cameras. Mr Spiehler's $350 Olympus digital is broken and he has not bought another. He has a large family and is a millionaire several times over. His wife loved the camera but can't make it work. Bruce is the President. He also has a working Olympus digital that he uses to take pictures of his kids soccer team to make ID's for the soccer events. Otherwise it remains in his desk drawer at work. I have a none working Nikon. Remember this is a group of highly compensated people (engineers). Our non degreed office manager makes $75000 a year. She doesn't have a digital camera. Most do not even own a SLR. I think this group is too close to the industry. Film is still too easy and familiar and will remain so. A lot of people still can't work their VCR's. I do agree that large corporate mentality is pushing this to happen. -Original Message- From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 1:15 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale I disagree. Film will die in 35mm and medium format because digital will soon be better. I see it just like what happened to the home movie market in the 70's. video cameras quickly killed them and you dont see too many people shooting super-8 film now do you? Those cameras and projectors are essentially worthless now. JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 12:21 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale I think the whole digital thing has to be put in perspective. It IS taking off. People are trading in their film cameras to get money to buy digital cameras because they must have the LATEST AND GREATEST thing. There are thousands of used film cameras coming in to camera stores and not too many buyers. The potential buyers (like many of us) are thinking to ourselves that we might want the ist-D so we are not going to buy the LX going for a good price or the MX going for a song. That pushes the prices down even more. Camera companies and film cameras are sending out signals that their focus is shifting. People panic. Trade in more film cameras for digital. Prices keep going down. (Sounds like the Stock market a few years ago. Actually it sounds like the burst of the high tech bubble in the markets.) My prediction: Things will eventually quiet down. Digital will be a strong influence in our society and one that will continue to grow. Film will still be around and co-exist with digital for many many years. Eventually film cameras will start to increase in price and then everyone will want them. It's just one big cycle. I'll bet alot of the photographers who went digital were also among the first to sell their mutual funds when things turned bad. Just my 2 cents Vic
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
JCO wrote I disagree. Film will die in 35mm and medium format because digital will soon be better. I see it just like what happened to the home movie market in the 70's. video cameras quickly killed them and you dont see too many people shooting super-8 film now do you? Those cameras and projectors are essentially worthless now. Actually this is interesting; whilst it's true that video cameras have overwhelmed 8mm film cameras, (and it would be a fool who denied it), at the same time it hasn't destroyed them completely. Check out for example http://www.widescreen-centre.co.uk where you can still buy film and cameras. You can even buy Standard-8 film for heaven's sake! Meanwhile 16mm film is still being fairly widely used by students, independents and documentary film makers and of course most 'movies are shot on even larger formats. So is this an anology to the way that still film will go? The vast majority of consumers will switch to digital, ending with 35mm overwhelmed in a similar way to how Super/Standard-8 was. Medium-format will still be more widely available for the artists/connoisseur who wants a particular look (like 16mm movie film) and professional high-standard work will be done on large format (35mm/70mm movie films). Chris
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
The film is expensive but the cameras and projectors are nearly worthless! J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Chris Stoddart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 5:36 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale JCO wrote I disagree. Film will die in 35mm and medium format because digital will soon be better. I see it just like what happened to the home movie market in the 70's. video cameras quickly killed them and you dont see too many people shooting super-8 film now do you? Those cameras and projectors are essentially worthless now. Actually this is interesting; whilst it's true that video cameras have overwhelmed 8mm film cameras, (and it would be a fool who denied it), at the same time it hasn't destroyed them completely. Check out for example http://www.widescreen-centre.co.uk where you can still buy film and cameras. You can even buy Standard-8 film for heaven's sake! Meanwhile 16mm film is still being fairly widely used by students, independents and documentary film makers and of course most 'movies are shot on even larger formats. So is this an anology to the way that still film will go? The vast majority of consumers will switch to digital, ending with 35mm overwhelmed in a similar way to how Super/Standard-8 was. Medium-format will still be more widely available for the artists/connoisseur who wants a particular look (like 16mm movie film) and professional high-standard work will be done on large format (35mm/70mm movie films). Chris
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
students and school are using 16mm film for different reasons. they have to train people to use both film and video and the 16mm equipment is already paid for. the medium format shooters with the resources are switching in droves to the Canon 1DS because as far as they are concerned, it already is better than medium format. it's going to become niche even faster than 35mm. Herb... - Original Message - From: Chris Stoddart [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 5:35 AM Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale Meanwhile 16mm film is still being fairly widely used by students, independents and documentary film makers and of course most 'movies are shot on even larger formats. So is this an anology to the way that still film will go? The vast majority of consumers will switch to digital, ending with 35mm overwhelmed in a similar way to how Super/Standard-8 was. Medium-format will still be more widely available for the artists/connoisseur who wants a particular look (like 16mm movie film) and professional high-standard work will be done on large format (35mm/70mm movie films).
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My prediction: Things will eventually quiet down. Digital will be a strong influence in our society and one that will continue to grow. Film will still be around and co-exist with digital for many many years. Eventually film cameras will start to increase in price and then everyone will want them. It's just one big cycle. My prediction: Digital will take over more and more of the film market as time goes by. Film ps's will die out within a few years, as the price of good-quality digital systems drops to--or below--the cost of cheap film ps's. Note that I said digital systems, and not cameras. Right now you can buy a Pentax 33L or 33LF for the same price as a good film ps, and get good 4x6 prints, decent 5x7's, and (for the average person) not bad 8x10's. The problem is that you then have to buy a larger memory card, rechargeable NiMHs, a case, perhaps a card reader, or an AC adapter, or even a computer. When the price of a good digital system drops a bit more, film ps's will be effectively dead. SLRs will take longer to go. There's still a huge market for cheap entry-level SLRs. Students love 'em because used ones are well-built and often fully mechanical, and others like them because of the flexibility offered by interchangeable lenses. When DSLRs drop in price to be comparable to film SLRs, then you can expect to see film SLR sales decline sharply. I don't think film will ever make a comeback, except in the hands of a few. It will still exist for a long time, but its user base will be limited. I expect to see DP prices for film rise in the future, and I expect the cost of repairing a film SLR to go up as well. chris
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
- Original Message - From: graywolf Camera maker's have to be glad for digital right now or they would have very few sales as folks hang on waiting for better times. I mean how likely is someone who just got laid off along with 2500 of his co-workers to go out and but a new high-end camera? And how likely is he to go out and sell his 6x7? I did! (the first, not the second. I kept the 67 ;-) ) But you're right. Normal people wouldn't do what I did. Blowing a wad of cash on a high end digital camera and lenses when they've just been laid off. There was method in my madness though. Having the gear has proved an invaluable sideline and it looks like I will be heaviliy in demand next year (fingers crossed!) I admit that I sold some Pentax stuff along the way, but I wouldn't have had to if they'd been a bit quicker in shipping that darn *istD!! wendy beard ottawa, canada http://www.muddypawz.net
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
it's already declined sharply. the total SLR market hasn't changed much, according to Pop Photo's reporting of a Photo Marketing Association report, only difference is that this past year, DSLRs made up 40% of the sales whereas 3 years ago, it was nonexistent. Herb - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 10:44 AM Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale SLRs will take longer to go. There's still a huge market for cheap entry-level SLRs. Students love 'em because used ones are well-built and often fully mechanical, and others like them because of the flexibility offered by interchangeable lenses. When DSLRs drop in price to be comparable to film SLRs, then you can expect to see film SLR sales decline sharply.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
It's funny that digital photography supporters keep saying that there are no processing costs in filmless photography. That's only true if you only want digital files, to email or look at on your monitor. If you want prints, you still have to pay for them. For the working pro, printing only the images that someone's actually paying for (no more proofs) represents a definite saving, but it's still not free. For the hobbyist, if you'd been getting very few keepers per roll with your film camera, there's a saving with digital, but if you want large numbers of prints to share, give away, or maybe even sell, it's another story. You either print them yourself (expensive), or head to the lab to get them done, just like before. In either case, it's still not free. If you're happy with your digital camera, great! Just don't keep saying the pictures are free. Pat White
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
The cards start paying for themselves the second time that you format and re-use them. Though they seem expensive in the beginning, after a few years, you can pretty much pay for the cards and the camera that you use them in. How many rolls of film do you shoot per year? Add up the cost of the film. The digital darkroom isn't free but, if you are reading this list, you've already got most of what you need in hardware. If you are as meticulous in shooting with a digital camera as you are in shooting with a film camera, you won't need expensive software to fix your pictures. I, personally take my digital images to WalMart and let them print 4 x 6 prints of the keepers on their Fuji Frontier. $0.26 per print is cheaper than I can do it at home. Anything I want to print really big, bigger than 13 x 19, I upload to Ofoto.com. A 20 x 30 print costs About $23.00. Yes, the Kodak folks at Ofoto make a great 20 x 30 print from a 6MP DSLR. As a matter of fact, they say you don't need that much resolution to get a good 20 x 30 print. Now you know all of my secrets Len * There's no place like 127.0.0.1 -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 2:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale How much film could you buy for the cost of a given memory card? IOW, at what point does the card start paying for itself? And how many cards do people have? Bruce Dayton wrote: Hope this is making sense. In a nutshell, the ability to shoot without the concern of cost. Another example - My wife is quite cognizant of the cost per frame on her 35mm camera. I believe it to be about .50 each (film/develop/print). So she would mentally count the cost as she shot. Opting many times not to take/try a shot because she didn't want to pay for it. Now with her little Optio S, she will go out and freely shoot whatever takes her fancy. She may shoot about 90 frames of which later she wants 5-10 printed. Others she may not print but still want to keep, just in case.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
This is a very interesting thread - and very relevant to myself. I am currently in a bit of a quandry wondering what direction to take. I was HANGING out for the D-ist to arrive here in Oz, but then couldn't bring myself to part the the $3k to buy one. I was wanting to hang onto my $$ to go towards a new studio set up. Now, I am at a crossroads again - I have a HUGE project about to commence - a 12 month calendar for SIDS Australia, that will go national in 2005 and be available at the likes of K-Mart, Target, all newsagents and Angerson Robertson Bookworld. It will be in conjunction with their Red Nose Day Promotions. Anyways, I can see the obvious benefit in me being able to shoot digital in this instance, so that really goes without saying. My query is though, to you wedding and portrait photographers. I am still shooting exclusively film, and scanning and converting my files digitally with Photoshop. I actually like this method as it effectively means that I have a 2-in-1 backup ie the digital files PLUS film. It is however, very time consuming, and I am really trying to come up with sure fire way of doing things, if I do take the plunge to the D-ist. My main stumbling block is the fact that I am in the country and country people tend to like things on paper. Most turn their nose up in disgust at the idea of photographs being on a cd-rom. (OTOH, all of my Brisbane clients are pretty much requesting JUST to have everything on CD!) Only approx. 70% of the population even have computers, with waaay less having internet or email capabilities. Currently, I sell my portrait/wedding packages on a per roll basis, with all proofs being usable 5x7s that the client gets to keep. I have a personal aversion to daylight robbery, and find that this way gives my clients the best value for their money. So how do you guys who are shooting digital go about it? I mean, alot of my clients won't be able to access my web galleries or even have their proofs emailed to them. Many of them live way out of town and would probably be extremely intimidated if a cd arrived in the mail. The cost of having digital files printed in QLD still exceeds even 5x7 inch film proofs... Also, my nearest photolab is 3 hours away and currently I send EVERYTHING away, which to a very impatient woman, is an absolute nightmare. Digital, in this instance, would be absolute bliss. Ok, so sorry, as you who remember me will know, I tend to think out loud and often digress, but I am sure that most of you will get the gist of what I am asking here. All thoughts and suggestions most appreciated! tan.x. - Original Message - From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 11:55 PM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale While most of the news photogs have gone that way. And most of the high-end big city commercial photogs (though I don't think those guys are using 6mp DSLR's). I doubt that most of the commercial photogs in smaller towns, nor very many portrait photographers have gone fully digital as yet. Even though there are real economic advantages for a pro to do so. I have to admit however that I have not done a survey on this. I would bet however that most of the used medium format you are seeing on the market is not being dumped by pros but by amateurs like us here on the list who can not afford to keep both systems. -- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Lasse Karlsson Subject: An observation re Pentax for sale I noticed an unusually high number of Pentax 67 and 645 items for sale on a Swedish second hand online store yesterday. Is this a sign of the times? And in that case, what does the sign tell us? It means that the pro boys are figuring out that 6mp digital cameras are equal to the task that they have been using medium format for up to now. The signs tell us that the demise of film is probably closer than most of the people on this list are comfortable with. William Robb -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
You have but one memory card? Using MedF, right? The numbers would, of course, be quite a bit different with 35mm, of course. It certainly works out well for you, that's for sure. I've got two 1GB microdrives, at $175 each, for a total of $350. That's comparable to the cost of one 20-roll box of Provia 100-F (around $100) plus what I pay for developing and mounting at a one-hour lab I trust. I could get processing a little cheaper, so let's say that the drives are both paid for after 1000 exposures. Bruce Dayton wrote: Shel, Let's see. Film costs me $4.00/roll. I get 10 shots. Developing costs $3.75. Prints cost .50 each. So cost per shot is about $1.30. A 256MB memory card costs me about $50. I get about 50 frames on it. That is about $1.00/frame for the first use. Then I can start using it over and over. I'd say, that for me, the payback is almost immediate.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Hi, Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Also, my nearest photolab is 3 hours away and currently I send EVERYTHING away, which to a very impatient woman, is an absolute nightmare. Digital, in this instance, would be absolute bliss. Why do you not process your own? At the most, £200 for a Jobo processor and tanks to process up to five at a time. £15 to process 10 C-41 36exp films. Probably cheaper if you are buying inquantity and tax deductible. Or you could go the whole hog and buy one of the Jobo ATL series autoprocessors. If you go digital you will, in your situation, be spending more, not less time in front of a screen and you will need to invest in a high-end printer (or digital minilab) to create the output. mike
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
I would like to see the reletive price breakdown for 10 wall hanger images. Not for 1000 throwaways. (grin) -- Shel Belinkoff wrote: You have but one memory card? Using MedF, right? The numbers would, of course, be quite a bit different with 35mm, of course. It certainly works out well for you, that's for sure. Bruce Dayton wrote: Shel, Let's see. Film costs me $4.00/roll. I get 10 shots. Developing costs $3.75. Prints cost .50 each. So cost per shot is about $1.30. A 256MB memory card costs me about $50. I get about 50 frames on it. That is about $1.00/frame for the first use. Then I can start using it over and over. I'd say, that for me, the payback is almost immediate. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
If you are going to make money with it lease a digital. The lease payments are 100% deductable (at least in the US). Why tie up your capital? And by the time the lease runs out there will be a better camera available anyway. -- Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: This is a very interesting thread - and very relevant to myself. I am currently in a bit of a quandry wondering what direction to take. I was HANGING out for the D-ist to arrive here in Oz, but then couldn't bring myself to part the the $3k to buy one. I was wanting to hang onto my $$ to go towards a new studio set up. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Most pros gave up in house processing long ago. Because processing is an $8.00 and hour job. A $100 an hour photographer would be a fool to waste his time on it. -- mike wilson wrote: Hi, Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Also, my nearest photolab is 3 hours away and currently I send EVERYTHING away, which to a very impatient woman, is an absolute nightmare. Digital, in this instance, would be absolute bliss. Why do you not process your own? At the most, £200 for a Jobo processor and tanks to process up to five at a time. £15 to process 10 C-41 36exp films. Probably cheaper if you are buying inquantity and tax deductible. Or you could go the whole hog and buy one of the Jobo ATL series autoprocessors. If you go digital you will, in your situation, be spending more, not less time in front of a screen and you will need to invest in a high-end printer (or digital minilab) to create the output. mike -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Hi there Mike! Many thanks for your suggestions. The primary reasons I have never taken to processing my own films are aged 12 mths, 4 and 6. (Yep, the 12mth old is the reason for my disappearance from the list, sorry guys, if I didn't fill you in on her impending arrival at the time!). The need to lock myself away in a dark room for many hours at a time, is just all too difficult - my 4 and 6 year olds would succeed in trashing my house, killing each other and painting the walls with vegemite. However, working on the 'puter is not such an issue as I actually get to WATCH them trashing my house, killing each other and painting the walls with vegemite! Also, with young kids in the house, the idea of lots of chemicals in vicinity isn't too appealing. I have on many occasions however, considered at least developing my own film and just scanning the negs. At the moment I do all of my work in Photoshop (usually scanned from 5x7s), upload it via ftp to my pro lab and then they send it out to me. I don't think I would ever actually consider printing them myself, the ftp works really well, and the results are lovely. Have just had a guy really pushing for me to use his lab, by offering really cheap roll scans (18mb files and using Digital ICE) with processing. This all sounds great to me, as it is less scanning for me and I am forever fighting with my scanner to keep it dust/finger print free. HOWEVER, the luxury of having a digital body where it comes straight from the camera, eliminating all need for any scanning, is just all too inviting. It is all a matter of and quality though, and whether I need those Elinchrom Monoblocs more than I do the D-ist. Then, as I am sure you have all discussed in my absence, it also raises the issue of lens compatibility/focal lengths, and I am not sure if I am ready to change my entire collection just at the moment. I have a few new favourites that I am really enjoying playing with at the moment. Mind you my ever-expanding behind would probably appreciate the Monoblocs, as I seem to really be wearing a good seat into my computer chair these days - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 7:51 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Hi, Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Also, my nearest photolab is 3 hours away and currently I send EVERYTHING away, which to a very impatient woman, is an absolute nightmare. Digital, in this instance, would be absolute bliss. Why do you not process your own? At the most, £200 for a Jobo processor and tanks to process up to five at a time. £15 to process 10 C-41 36exp films. Probably cheaper if you are buying inquantity and tax deductible. Or you could go the whole hog and buy one of the Jobo ATL series autoprocessors. If you go digital you will, in your situation, be spending more, not less time in front of a screen and you will need to invest in a high-end printer (or digital minilab) to create the output. mike
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
OT- my apologies to you all - I just noticed that all of my posts are showing Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist. In this context, it looks extremely pompous and conceited! lol. I subscribed to the list using my work email addy, and forgot that that is the display I have for it! Sorry guys, really, I am not totally full of myself... I promise *hides head sheepishly*... ;-) tan.x. - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 7:51 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Hi, Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Also, my nearest photolab is 3 hours away and currently I send EVERYTHING away, which to a very impatient woman, is an absolute nightmare. Digital, in this instance, would be absolute bliss. Why do you not process your own? At the most, £200 for a Jobo processor and tanks to process up to five at a time. £15 to process 10 C-41 36exp films. Probably cheaper if you are buying inquantity and tax deductible. Or you could go the whole hog and buy one of the Jobo ATL series autoprocessors. If you go digital you will, in your situation, be spending more, not less time in front of a screen and you will need to invest in a high-end printer (or digital minilab) to create the output. mike
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Same goes here in Oz for tax - AND I have actually looked at doing just that. Somewhere along the line I forgot about it, but might just look into it again. I can feel the d-ist in my hands already! lol... BTW, I totall agree with this And by the time the lease runs out there will be a better camera available anyway, which is why I have held off for as long as I have. The technology is such that it will be obsolete in 12 months time, and we will be offered 12 megapixel cameras at todays 6mp prices. Mind you, don't like the chances of my 1.7ghz processor/256mb RAM/Win 98 being able to handle that large a file size! It struggles with Photoshop 7.0 as it is! hohum, yet another upgrade to think of... - Original Message - From: graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 9:02 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale If you are going to make money with it lease a digital. The lease payments are 100% deductable (at least in the US). Why tie up your capital? And by the time the lease runs out there will be a better camera available anyway. -- Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: This is a very interesting thread - and very relevant to myself. I am currently in a bit of a quandry wondering what direction to take. I was HANGING out for the D-ist to arrive here in Oz, but then couldn't bring myself to part the the $3k to buy one. I was wanting to hang onto my $$ to go towards a new studio set up. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Well, now that you mention it, I ~was~ wondering about that Photographic Artist bit... vbg BTW, hi. I've been active on the list for several years now, but I faintly recall that you may have been around, perhaps during my lurlking days, or possibly when I first started posting. In any event we certainly didn't get to know each other at all. You'll very quickly realize (if you haven't already) that much of what I say is tongue in cheek, and pretty much always to be taken worth a grain of salt. The odd salient point accidently slips through from time to time, but I'm working on keeping those to a minimum. (Hey, that's two salt metaphors in successive sentences. Not bad, eh?) So, pleased to meet you. It seems from some of the other welcomes that I've read that you were quite popular poster in your day g. Everyone seems quite happy to have you back. cheers, frank Rider of Bicycles The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 08:42:24 +1000 OT- my apologies to you all - I just noticed that all of my posts are showing Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist. In this context, it looks extremely pompous and conceited! lol. I subscribed to the list using my work email addy, and forgot that that is the display I have for it! Sorry guys, really, I am not totally full of myself... I promise *hides head sheepishly*... ;-) tan.x. - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 7:51 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Hi, Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Also, my nearest photolab is 3 hours away and currently I send EVERYTHING away, which to a very impatient woman, is an absolute nightmare. Digital, in this instance, would be absolute bliss. Why do you not process your own? At the most, £200 for a Jobo processor and tanks to process up to five at a time. £15 to process 10 C-41 36exp films. Probably cheaper if you are buying inquantity and tax deductible. Or you could go the whole hog and buy one of the Jobo ATL series autoprocessors. If you go digital you will, in your situation, be spending more, not less time in front of a screen and you will need to invest in a high-end printer (or digital minilab) to create the output. mike _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Hi there Frank, Lovely to make your acquaintance! lol. I hear you on the tongue in cheek thing, and have learnt in the past that it pays to have a very open mind and a good sense of humour when using these lists! Flame wars are very entertaining to watch, but I generally don't participate. hehe. As for my being popular - I think it has more to do with me, at that time, being a true rose amongst the thorns - I think there was only one other lady on list when I was around previously, and she wasn't a very regular poster. So being a 24 year old girl, kind of helped my notoriety a bit. Mind you, I do remember thinking that Shel was a girl for a bit there too! (Thinking that Shel was short for Michelle). Stood corrected (and very embarrassed!)when Stan emailed me a pic of him though! lol! It's lovely to see now that there are a few ladies here though - I feel much more at home! ;-) Sorry, totally off topic guys, better get back to the subject at hand, or I'll be making enemies already! tan.x. - Original Message - From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 9:47 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Well, now that you mention it, I ~was~ wondering about that Photographic Artist bit... vbg BTW, hi. I've been active on the list for several years now, but I faintly recall that you may have been around, perhaps during my lurlking days, or possibly when I first started posting. In any event we certainly didn't get to know each other at all. You'll very quickly realize (if you haven't already) that much of what I say is tongue in cheek, and pretty much always to be taken worth a grain of salt. The odd salient point accidently slips through from time to time, but I'm working on keeping those to a minimum. (Hey, that's two salt metaphors in successive sentences. Not bad, eh?) So, pleased to meet you. It seems from some of the other welcomes that I've read that you were quite popular poster in your day g. Everyone seems quite happy to have you back. cheers, frank Rider of Bicycles The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 08:42:24 +1000 OT- my apologies to you all - I just noticed that all of my posts are showing Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist. In this context, it looks extremely pompous and conceited! lol. I subscribed to the list using my work email addy, and forgot that that is the display I have for it! Sorry guys, really, I am not totally full of myself... I promise *hides head sheepishly*... ;-) tan.x. - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 7:51 AM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Hi, Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Also, my nearest photolab is 3 hours away and currently I send EVERYTHING away, which to a very impatient woman, is an absolute nightmare. Digital, in this instance, would be absolute bliss. Why do you not process your own? At the most, £200 for a Jobo processor and tanks to process up to five at a time. £15 to process 10 C-41 36exp films. Probably cheaper if you are buying inquantity and tax deductible. Or you could go the whole hog and buy one of the Jobo ATL series autoprocessors. If you go digital you will, in your situation, be spending more, not less time in front of a screen and you will need to invest in a high-end printer (or digital minilab) to create the output. mike _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
- Original Message - From: graywolf Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale I would bet however that most of the used medium format you are seeing on the market is not being dumped by pros but by amateurs like us here on the list who can not afford to keep both systems. Around here, there aren't a lot af amateurs using medium format in the first place. I do know of close to a dozen local pro boys who are out of medium format completely, having bought into Canon digital. William Robb
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
On 27/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: And how many cards do people have? 3 cards 1 @ 256 MB 2 @ 512 MB would like more but don't need them. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Hi Bruce ... You've brought up an interesting point that I was mulling over while making a few photos earlier. There's this discussion going on about the cost of working with film v working with digital, and, depending on what one wants to throw into the argument (buying a scanner, a printer, film cost v memory card cost, the cost of the camera/lenses, and so on - hell, if y'wanna get fancy, one can include the time value of money, amortizing the cost over the useful life of the equipment, recovering depreciation, resale value, ad nauseum), and it seems to me that the financial aspect of one format over the other is of no consequence from the standpoint of preference unless one is using the gear to generate income. Otherwise photography is a hobby that's generally paid for with discretionary income, so what difference does it make if digi or film costs more. The hobbyist will buy what s/he prefers, for whatever reason s/he prefers, and that's the end of it. When was the last time you heard a discussion about 35mm v MedF v LF with the cost being an argument? kind regards, shel Bruce Dayton wrote: Hello Shel, Actually, I already had 2-256MB cards from other digi's. So I didn't even buy them. They have already logged at least 1000 pictures. I did buy a 512MB card, though. My point was that it doesn't take long at all to recoup the cost of the card. It should be pointed out that I already have computer/printer/software for other uses so that was not a necessary cost for me. And yes, Medium Format is what I have been using. It is more costly per frame to shoot. In fact, pretty much I don't shoot it unless someone is paying me to. Doesn't give me much practice or experimentation.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Never enough And how many cards do people have?
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Um, sorry to inform you but film can be scanned and then digitally processed the same way as a digital original. Sorry to inform you that we know that - some of us have been doing exactly that for the last five years or more. But it's completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. It doesn't save you anything on film costs, and you have to pay for the scanner; until recently these cost nearly as much as the *ist-D. As such, it's unlikely that anything involving scanning film is going to be a serious contender for a low-cost setup. J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: John Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 3:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale If you're happy with your digital camera, great! Just don't keep saying the pictures are free. Noone has said that. They have said film is free, though - those experimental shots to try different techniques don't cost anything. It's also a lot cheaper to produce anything larger than a 6x4 print yourself at home than it is to pay someone else to do it. An 8x10 from Wolfe Camera costs around $5. For $1.50 in consumables I can produce an 8x10 with far better colour balance than anything from Wolfe, cropped exactly how I want it. Sure, I have to pay for the printer, too. But even at $3.50 a print that doesn't take too long. And don't even look at the cost of one-off prints from a pro lab. In my case I expect the *ist-D to pay for itself in less than two years, based solely on the cost of film and processing. But the big benefit, for most users, isn't the cost - it's the fact that anyone with a computer now has access to the flexibility and control over the process that was previously only available to the very few people who set up their own photographic darkroom. If you are happy with your film camera, and 5c 6x4 prints from the minilab at your local discount warehouse, great! But ...
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
you stated below that the big advantage of a digicam was the control available only darkroom users. Scanning film gives same exact control and you dont need a darkroom. J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: John Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 10:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Um, sorry to inform you but film can be scanned and then digitally processed the same way as a digital original. Sorry to inform you that we know that - some of us have been doing exactly that for the last five years or more. But it's completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. It doesn't save you anything on film costs, and you have to pay for the scanner; until recently these cost nearly as much as the *ist-D. As such, it's unlikely that anything involving scanning film is going to be a serious contender for a low-cost setup. -- -- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -- -- -Original Message- From: John Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 3:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale If you're happy with your digital camera, great! Just don't keep saying the pictures are free. Noone has said that. They have said film is free, though - those experimental shots to try different techniques don't cost anything. It's also a lot cheaper to produce anything larger than a 6x4 print yourself at home than it is to pay someone else to do it. An 8x10 from Wolfe Camera costs around $5. For $1.50 in consumables I can produce an 8x10 with far better colour balance than anything from Wolfe, cropped exactly how I want it. Sure, I have to pay for the printer, too. But even at $3.50 a print that doesn't take too long. And don't even look at the cost of one-off prints from a pro lab. In my case I expect the *ist-D to pay for itself in less than two years, based solely on the cost of film and processing. But the big benefit, for most users, isn't the cost - it's the fact that anyone with a computer now has access to the flexibility and control over the process that was previously only available to the very few people who set up their own photographic darkroom. If you are happy with your film camera, and 5c 6x4 prints from the minilab at your local discount warehouse, great! But ...
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
I'm up to 9 gigs. tv -Original Message- From: Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 7:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Never enough And how many cards do people have?
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
-Original Message- From: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist wrote: Also, my nearest photolab is 3 hours away and currently I send EVERYTHING away, which to a very impatient woman, is an absolute nightmare. Digital, in this instance, would be absolute bliss. Why do you not process your own? It's an extremely inefficient way to operate as a photographer. I tried it for a while, and it's just nuts. If you go digital you will, in your situation, be spending more, not less time in front of a screen and you will need to invest in a high-end printer (or digital minilab) to create the output. No, you don't. The vast majority of pros send their files to a lab, just like they did with film. You do have to spend more time in front of the computer, but overall I have less work to do. tv
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
-Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer - Photographic Artist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] My main stumbling block is the fact that I am in the country and country people tend to like things on paper. Most turn their nose up in disgust at the idea of photographs being on a cd-rom. (OTOH, all of my Brisbane clients are pretty much requesting JUST to have everything on CD!) Only approx. 70% of the population even have computers, with waaay less having internet or email capabilities. Currently, I sell my portrait/wedding packages on a per roll basis, with all proofs being usable 5x7s that the client gets to keep. I have a personal aversion to daylight robbery, and find that this way gives my clients the best value for their money. Interesting way to put it. So how do you guys who are shooting digital go about it? That's, uh, kind of a broad question I mean, alot of my clients won't be able to access my web galleries or even have their proofs emailed to them. Many of them live way out of town and would probably be extremely intimidated if a cd arrived in the mail. The cost of having digital files printed in QLD still exceeds even 5x7 inch film proofs... What's QLD? I don't do paper proofs anymore, but if someone really wants them, they can buy them. Another option is a proof magazine. It's a stack 10x15's with 6 images per page spiral bound. tv -- Thomas Van Veen Photography www.thomasvanveen.com 301-758-3085
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
-Original Message- From: Pat White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] It's funny that digital photography supporters keep saying that there are no processing costs in filmless photography. Who said that? tv
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, Pat White wrote: It's funny that digital photography supporters keep saying that there are no processing costs in filmless photography. That's only true if you only want digital files, to email or look at on your monitor. If you want prints, you still have to pay for them. Of course. No one, to my knowledge, has claimed that prints are free. However, you no longer have to worry about film and dp costs if you feel like shooting several hundred photos in a day. If you bring them enough images on a CD, local pro labs charge anywhere from 20-30 cents CAN per 4x5/4x6 print from a digital file. At this price digital is much cheaper than film plus good developing, especially since you can pick and choose which shots to print. chris
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Maybe some people just enjoy taking a few snaps a month, don't want to spend time practicing, and much prefer other pleasures. Perhaps photography means something different to them than it does to you ... Herb Chong wrote: in addition to all this, if you are a little bit serious about photography, you will be learning from the photographs you take. if you take a lot, you will learn more quickly. that is one reason why i don't understand the 35mm shooters on this list who take less than a couple of rolls a month. how can you keep up your skills well enough to generate good shots reliably when you must if you don't practice. digital encourages both practice and experimentation.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
And since most digicams now support DPOF, the lab can print only those images you request, without resorting to a contact sheet or negatives. As a matter of fact, many inkjet printers now support DPOF through card readers. Bill - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 10:40 PM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, Pat White wrote: It's funny that digital photography supporters keep saying that there are no processing costs in filmless photography. That's only true if you only want digital files, to email or look at on your monitor. If you want prints, you still have to pay for them. Of course. No one, to my knowledge, has claimed that prints are free. However, you no longer have to worry about film and dp costs if you feel like shooting several hundred photos in a day. If you bring them enough images on a CD, local pro labs charge anywhere from 20-30 cents CAN per 4x5/4x6 print from a digital file. At this price digital is much cheaper than film plus good developing, especially since you can pick and choose which shots to print. chris
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
The vast majority just want to record an event in their lives, and could care less about the nuances a serious photographer is concerned with. These folks are quite satisfied with the results from a one time use camera, as well they should be. Bill - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 11:01 PM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale Maybe some people just enjoy taking a few snaps a month, don't want to spend time practicing, and much prefer other pleasures. Perhaps photography means something different to them than it does to you ... Herb Chong wrote: in addition to all this, if you are a little bit serious about photography, you will be learning from the photographs you take. if you take a lot, you will learn more quickly. that is one reason why i don't understand the 35mm shooters on this list who take less than a couple of rolls a month. how can you keep up your skills well enough to generate good shots reliably when you must if you don't practice. digital encourages both practice and experimentation.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
the vast majority aren't people on this list. one of the reasons for being here is that the members say that they take their photography seriously, yet, i hear people on this list struggle to get up to a few hundred photos a year. they argue and moan over the digital wave overtaking us. they say they take take their photography seriously, but they don't seem to. Herb... - Original Message - From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 11:09 PM Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale The vast majority just want to record an event in their lives, and could care less about the nuances a serious photographer is concerned with. These folks are quite satisfied with the results from a one time use camera, as well they should be.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Sheesh, Herb, everyone has different points of reference. To some you may be a rank amateur that practices far too little and couldn't make a quality print if you sold your soul to the devil. People have other things to do in their lives - raise a family, put bread on the table, keep a roof over their heads, fight illness ... maybe they do take their photography seriously, but other things take precedence. I thought I was a critical curmudgeon ... you take the prize! shel Herb Chong wrote: the vast majority aren't people on this list. one of the reasons for being here is that the members say that they take their photography seriously, yet, i hear people on this list struggle to get up to a few hundred photos a year. they argue and moan over the digital wave overtaking us. they say they take take their photography seriously, but they don't seem to.
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
Strangely enough sheet film had already gone to where advanced amateurs and fine arts photographers are the pretty much the only ones using it even before digital became a major market contender, so digital will not make the inroads there that it will in the smaller formats. I'd have to agree with that in terms of BW, and for colour it is probably almost there now. There really are very few situations where you need to use sheet film; you do so because you want to. So long as I can still get FP4 and HP5 in 4x5 I'll be content, and even if it got to the stage that only one 100 and one 400 emulsion where available from anybody I'd probably still survive. Still, it does seem to be the pro gear that is being dumped. My local pro dealer is awash in Hasselblads and F3/F4s. The up side to this has been the very low prices I have paid for darkroom gear over the last few months, probably 10% of new price for quality equipment. Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Lasse wrote: I noticed an unusually high number of Pentax 67 and 645 items for sale on a Swedish second hand online store yesterday. Is this a sign of the times? Yes, I believe so. And in that case, what does the sign tell us? That if you are interested in that stuff, and wait a little more, you'll pay even less. Dario Bonazza
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
You mean, I can finally decide to go Medium Format, if I want? Reasonably priced? After I got an LX and an MX and an Optio S4? I thought heaven was already here! g keith whaley Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: Lasse wrote: I noticed an unusually high number of Pentax 67 and 645 items for sale on a Swedish second hand online store yesterday. Is this a sign of the times? Yes, I believe so. And in that case, what does the sign tell us? That if you are interested in that stuff, and wait a little more, you'll pay even less. Dario Bonazza
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
the sign is : advanced DSLRs will obsolete both 35mm AND medium format film cameras in no time at all. It will take some time to equal 4X5 and 8X10 film formats but I wouldnt be surprised if digital matches those in the very long run too. jco J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Lasse Karlsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 4:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: An observation re Pentax for sale I noticed an unusually high number of Pentax 67 and 645 items for sale on a Swedish second hand online store yesterday. Is this a sign of the times? And in that case, what does the sign tell us? Lasse
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
I disagree. I see no point in buying an *istD to take BW photographs. They will never replace silver. -Original Message- From: Bill Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 4:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An observation re Pentax for sale IMHO, advanced DSLRs have already made 35mm basically obsolete. Bill - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 5:01 PM Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale the sign is : advanced DSLRs will obsolete both 35mm AND medium format film cameras in no time at all. It will take some time to equal 4X5 and 8X10 film formats but I wouldnt be surprised if digital matches those in the very long run too. jco -- -- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -- -- -Original Message- From: Lasse Karlsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 4:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: An observation re Pentax for sale I noticed an unusually high number of Pentax 67 and 645 items for sale on a Swedish second hand online store yesterday. Is this a sign of the times? And in that case, what does the sign tell us? Lasse
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
-Original Message- From: Mark Stringer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I disagree. I see no point in buying an *istD to take BW photographs. They will never replace silver. Hmm. I had a full-on commercial darkroom, which I ditched within a month of going digital. In my case digital replaced silver fairly easily and painlessly. tv
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
Well, remember digital is not the only reason that photo equipment prices are down. The economy kind of sucks, but should be getting better at this point. My experience is that photo equipment prices lag the economy by a couple of years so there should be another couple of years of good buys out there. -- Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: I think that ALL prices for used film equipment (film cameras and dead-mount lenses and accessories) will reduce more and more as lots of stuff will be offered on the market, including MF. As better and better digital stuff will be on sale for lower and lower prices (probably never lower than a given threshold price for serious stuff) better and better MF used stuff will be on sale for lower and lower prices. So the 67 is going the digital way after all :-) Yes, I'm also thinking setting-up a 67 system, but since prices for MF equipment are more or less going to follow the same trend of digital stuff (according to my theory above) I'm not sure if I have to go digital or MF first. Dario Bonazza Keith Whaley wrote: You mean, I can finally decide to go Medium Format, if I want? Reasonably priced? After I got an LX and an MX and an Optio S4? I thought heaven was already here! g keith whaley Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: Lasse wrote: I noticed an unusually high number of Pentax 67 and 645 items for sale on a Swedish second hand online store yesterday. Is this a sign of the times? Yes, I believe so. And in that case, what does the sign tell us? That if you are interested in that stuff, and wait a little more, you'll pay even less. Dario Bonazza -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
- Original Message - From: Lasse Karlsson Subject: An observation re Pentax for sale I noticed an unusually high number of Pentax 67 and 645 items for sale on a Swedish second hand online store yesterday. Is this a sign of the times? And in that case, what does the sign tell us? It means that the pro boys are figuring out that 6mp digital cameras are equal to the task that they have been using medium format for up to now. The signs tell us that the demise of film is probably closer than most of the people on this list are comfortable with. William Robb
RE: An observation re Pentax for sale
Color did not replace BW. Bayonet mount did not replace screwmount. Who is going to want these used DSLR's in 5 years? People still covet the LX. Despite the Nikon story, digital cameras are not going to replace point and shoots. My Nikon 885 has been on the blink for 2 months. After $150 repair by Nikon it still does not work. The average guy is not likely to spend $400 on a point and shoot digital camera, repair it and then go spend another $400 on another. My wife has been using a Pentax IQ zoom and I my slr's. My money went for a FA77, FA24, PZ1p, 67II and my photos are better than ever. And you know what? I don't worry about losing my photos on a hard drive or cd that has the laminate separating. I know where the negatives are and scan in what I want. I like looking at my photos under a good light. I cannot judge much in the way of resolution on a monitor and the internet does not convey the elements of a good photograph. Digital is useful and may serve some commercial purposes well but there is a craft to photography. Digital still does not surpass a good film negative and print. Not even close to what can be done with a medium format camera. I will always have my digital camera. I like the technology but... Really, Chicken Little, the sky is not falling... -Original Message- From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 6:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale -Original Message- From: Mark Stringer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I disagree. I see no point in buying an *istD to take BW photographs. They will never replace silver. Hmm. I had a full-on commercial darkroom, which I ditched within a month of going digital. In my case digital replaced silver fairly easily and painlessly. tv
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
the manufacturers are making it happen. they are definitely cutting back on film camera production and people are buying the digitals. if film stabilizes at 10% of it's peak market share, you're going to have far less selection and higher costs. Herb - Original Message - From: Mark Stringer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 9:41 PM Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale Color did not replace BW. Bayonet mount did not replace screwmount. Who is going to want these used DSLR's in 5 years? People still covet the LX. Despite the Nikon story, digital cameras are not going to replace point and shoots. My Nikon 885 has been on the blink for 2 months. After $150 repair by Nikon it still does not work. The average guy is not likely to spend $400 on a point and shoot digital camera, repair it and then go spend another $400 on another.
Re: An observation re Pentax for sale
- Original Message - From: Mark Stringer Subject: RE: An observation re Pentax for sale Digital is useful and may serve some commercial purposes well but there is a craft to photography. Digital still does not surpass a good film negative and print. Not even close to what can be done with a medium format camera. I will always have my digital camera. I like the technology but... Really, Chicken Little, the sky is not falling... You need to get a little closer to the industry, thats all. William Robb
