Actualy Shel I contributed this comment.
>
> > Most Americans seem to have lost the feel for
> quality, p&s
> > cameras fit their needs. That's why film
> processors
> > generally produce mediocre results at best, and
> often
> > produce results that are rivaled by low resolution
> > digital cameras. Most American consumers don't
> know
> > better and don't care. Often they don't realize
> they
> > can do better.
>
--- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<SNIP>
> That said, did that many people care about quality
> before,
> apart from serious amateur and professional
> photographers, or
> were they just looking for snapshot quality pics of
> family,
> friends, and places they'd visited? And look at how
> many
> people on this list are buying and using mediocre
> quality
> lenses and getting average quality printing done at
> average
> quality labs. How many times have we read the word
> "acceptable" on this list to describe the results or
> the
> quality obtained by various lenses or printing. Far
> more than
> we've read the words "outstanding" or "exceptional".
<SNIP>
I think most of the people on the list are using these
services because they are what are available. (I
often do as most of my photographic work to what I
would consider experemental, I don't make my living as
a photographer anymore, although I have tried to in
the past).
Not to long ago in historical time Camera companys
were stressing, quality both in equipment and results.
The result was an explosion of 'High quality' cameras
and lenses, at what were then, considered consumer
prices, we are still reaping the benifits of that
explosion in the used camera market where you can
often pick up a like new example of some of the best
manual focus, lenses and cameras that Pentax, Olympus,
Minolta, Nikon, and Cannon (yes, I will commit the
herrisy of actualy mentioning the compition's names),
ever manufactured at prices that even given the
premium we pay for some of them, the prices are much
less than they are worth when inflation, manufacturing
cost, and yes results of proper use, are taken into
account. (The dollar isn't what used to be, nor the
yen the pound or the various '*mark(s)' etc).
The problem is that having a great camera doesn't make
you a great photographer. Learning the basics of
compostion isn't difficult but appling them can be
well a bitch, (I know, I produce a lot of crap). Add
in the added complications of depth of field and
shutter speed effects and well you begin to get a
level of disenchantment.
The average consumer in the US probably hasn't had
any training in composition after a rudementy Art
class, which they were probably sleeping through in
school. They get back their results expecting Ansel
Adams or Helmut Neuton, (after all they just spent
many hundreds of dollars so their results have to be
good) and they get dreck. Why spend the money on
equipment when you're results are equaled by a P&S.
They expect quality but don't believe they are capable
of it. It's the equivelent of Say's law, (bad money
drives out the good). In this case bad photography
and equipment drives out the good. If your pictures
look bad when you use an expensive, and complicated,
camera and send them to an expensive lab for
processing then buy an inexpensive simple to use
camera and use the minilab at X-mart, it will all
look the same. Most don't even get the results that
their p&s is capable of. At best they get an
inaccurate record.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Visit the PUG at
http://pug.komkon.org.
