That's pretty much where I'm at as well. The control one can exercise
in digital is a huge advantage. I can fine tune a shot with digital in
ways that would have required multiple shoot days with film. One
example that stands out in my mind is the shot I did of a woman
applying lipstick in a small handheld mirror. The lighting and framing
were very tricky. The review process was invaluable. My turnaround is
far faster as well. A big plus is that I no longer have to repair
negative scratches in lab processed film. Talk about labor intensive
computer work. I spent a lot more time making digital images from film
than I do processing my RAWs. The home darkroom was fun but it's
neither time nor cost efficient.
Paul
On Nov 11, 2005, at 2:31 PM, Cotty wrote:
On 11/11/05, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
Do you find that it's important for your subjects to get their results
quickly, and that a digital workflow is important in that regard, or
is
turn-around time not a big concern, and would film work just as well
for
you as far as the needs and preferences of your subjects are
concerned?
The turnaround time is not that important with either format. What is
much more important to me is the full control I have with digital.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com
_____________________________
