Also, I've never thought a lot about "colour balance" with film, but
perhaps that's because the lab has done the job for me? I wonder if
there are many labs that will accept "raw" files and do something
productive with them these days, by the way. Most of the "consumer"
ones I've come across seem to know of no other file format than JPEG,
if you know what I mean...
With digital, the photographer has become the photo lab, to a great
extent. If you don't intervene at all, and just hand over
autogenerated jpegs that the camera has spat out, you are handing over
a processed file that has limited potential for alteration.
More limited than the one of film, I suspect. Which is the main point,
really. Before I can *really* see digital as an advantage, I think it
has to offer me new options (compared to film) without making me
sacrifice what I get with film. Maybe all it takes is (more) labs that
work from "raw" files...
The user can control pretty much every step of the process, from
exposure to final print if they want to. The enthusiasts that tend to
habituate camera mailing lists such as this tend to be biased towards
this sort of control.
Good point. Maybe I shouldn't conclude based on hearing about all the
processing these people do, that I have to do all this work. Of course,
I have a certain bias towards control myself, but a the same time, I'm
probably a lot less enthusiastic about working on computers, in my spare
time, that is, than most people on this list.
- Toralf
- Re: Why I Haven't Yet Switched Toralf Lund
-
