I've seen where digital has in some ways raised the bar. To get the
exposure latitude with digital that is inherent in color negative film,
you have to shoot RAW and you have to know what you're doing. For the
time being at least, that means doing it yourself. A few of the
lightweight pros I've met who went back to film after a brief foray in
digital, complained that it "was too hard to get it right." By the way,
I see a business opportunity for someone who opens a pro lab that knows
how to handle RAW and can automate the process -- or charge enough to
make piecemeal work pay. I've talked to a number of wedding
photographers who are looking for just such a lab.
Paul
On Oct 29, 2005, at 12:22 AM, graywolf wrote:
I think I have to agree with that, Shel.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
It's just that attitude that has contributed to the lowering of the
quality
bar. Usable results - maybe. But high quality results - maybe not.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Tom Reese
They don't need to worry about exposure with color negative film.
There's
enough latitude that a three stop miss will still give usable
results.
I've saw evidence of that at the photo shop. We used to do a lot of
processing for pros. When they started making the transition to
digital
you could see who really had a handle on exposure and who didn't.
Not
many did.
