On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, F. Craig Callahan wrote:
> Hugo Gävert wrote:
>
> > I know your pain (though I don't have to pay that much for film)... I've
> > never understod those who say film is cheap
>
> Relative to the cost of your equipment . . . and to the loss of photos that
> can't be reproduced. Or the cost of travel: Not long ago I was at the top of
[...]
> my car for another roll of film and a different lens, I overheard a young couple
> discussing the scene:
>
> Him: "Should I take another one?"
> Her: "No--I don't want to waste film."
>
> Now, if they lived down the hill in Aspen this might make some sense, but if
> they were like me and had traveled 2000 miles to get there . . . well, you get
> the idea. To travel all that way and then try to save a few frames seems . . .
> counterproductive.
"Loss of photos" and "counterproductive"... not everybody think like that.
You talk like a pro who went there to shoot, whereas you make the young
couple sound like they were not even amateurs, but normal tourist who were
there for different reasons than getting the best possible photo. Why do
you expect the same devotion from them?
Sure, I agree that for a pro who gets paid for shooting film, the film
isn't something that he can spare. Pro's will have to shoot a lot to be
sure they got the best picture that will then in turn help them earn
living. I'm not a pro. I do not get paid for the photos I take. I take
them for me and my family, for memories and for pleasure, and for the
love of photography. I do take a lot of pictures, specially if I have
travelled somewhere far away. But I can not afford to take every photo
that I would like to. Many times I'm really wondering what would be the
best way to expose this scene - if film didn't cost, I could then just
shoot with AEB every time. Sometimes the scenes just are not at all that
important. Sometimes I can settle for less than optimal image, meaning if
the image might not perfect by some error that can not be seen untill the
film is developed, I will not take backup pictures of it to be sure. Then
again somethimes I do take another one to be sure I got it.
Besides saving on film (among others) has allowed me to get better lenses,
which then again have allowed me to really get better pictures. Spending
all my money on film instead of better equipment might have made me a
better photographer in some way, but I would not have been able to shoot
the kind of pictures that I like (and now I can shoot at least a bit
better with the equipments I now have). I think that would really have
been "couterproductive" for me.
We're not all millioners or professional photographers - not even
everybody.
Best regards,
Hugo.
************************************************************
** Hugo Gävert **
** [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hut.fi/~hugo **
************************************************************
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
