Hi Tim, I've been considering why I'd want a DSLR, and it comes down to mostly one reason: It's not for quality, it's not for how nice shooting RAW might be, it's not for any of the camera's features ... nope, it's because there are times - more and more often these days - when I'm just too lazy to process film. I've never gotten much enjoyment from agitating a development tank. So, it's laziness, pure and simple. Not laziness in shooting or composing a photo, but just too damned lazy to process film or drive it to the lab.
A secondary reason is for snaps ... family, friends, maybe shots around the neighborhood. I don't expect digital to improve my eye, quicken my reflexes, or teach me much about composition, although it will affect the way I see and work with light. That troubles me a bit, so I'll have to watch that closely when going from digi to B&W film. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Tim Øsleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Date: 7/28/2005 8:51:29 AM > Subject: RE: Have digital cameras made us better photographers? > > Bill. > Reading your post I find myself thinking that what you basically are saying, > is that you have become a lazy photographer. Lazy photographer as in - "a > photographer who shoots wildly, and has stopped reflecting". Am I right > about this? If not, please do ignore this friendly intended post.
