On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:02:00 +0100, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Date: 2006/06/20 Tue PM 05:45:19 GMT >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: The Middle-aged Man and the Sea >> >> Well, one thing digital has done for you is that it has got you posting >> pictures. And, dare I say, taking them? >> >> But the other things are that it's much cheaper (provided you take >> plenty >> of pictures), much more convenient (once you've learned all about >> digital >> processing and using PS), and offers you much more control (assuming you >> use colour). > > Unless you print the pictures you take; unless you have a decent lab to > process your slides; unless you have a decent lab to follow your > printing instructions. Decent labs (if you can find one) increase the cost of using film even more. >> That's the three Cs of digital: cost, convenience, control. > > It's the same three Cs of film. Kindly explain. John >> On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:08:38 +0100, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> >> Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff >> >> >> >> Hi Bob, >> >> >> >> I'd suggest upgrading to CS2. You may as well get the better >> >> raw converter >> >> and current features. I've used both CS and CS2, and CS2, by >> >> a definite >> >> margin, is a better program all the way. Bridge is far >> >> better to use on >> >> several levels than the file browser in PS 7.0 and CS. Plus, >> >> and I can't >> >> say for sure without checking, your camera may not be >> >> supported in CS - >> >> you'd have to check the Adobe site. >> > >> > Yes - I meant CS2. >> > >> > One of the things I don't like about digital photography is that I >> > have to learn a whole lot of new stuff, taking a lot of time, for >> > what? Do I get better results than film? Is it cheaper than film? Is >> > it more convenient than film? The benefits I've identified so far are >> > delayed-action chimping, and fast turnaround. I can live without fast >> > turnaround. I can see that chimping could have its uses. But are they >> > worth the time, cost and effort? Answers on a postcard, please. >> > >> >> >> >> It's funny you mentioned tilted horizons. I sometimes see >> >> that with the >> >> Pentax as well. Someone commented that the sensor could be >> >> tilted, but >> >> since you and i can get straight horizons as well, that may >> >> not be the case >> >> in our situations. What I ~think~ may be happening is that >> >> the shutter >> >> release button on the Pentax, and many other cameras, is >> >> rather low, not as >> >> protrusive, as on the Leicas and the earlier manual cameras >> >> that we're most >> >> used to. I think, at least in my case, the shorter release >> >> button causes >> >> me to slightly move the camera when making exposures, and >> >> that, coupled >> >> with the camera being shorter and not allowing quite the same grip >> > and >> >> leverage as a Leica/Conta/LX, etc., contributes to the >> >> movement and tilted >> >> horizons. I find that when i work very slowly, the horizon isn't a >> >> problem, but if shooting a little more quickly, I often get >> >> the tilt. The >> >> tilt, in my case, is always in the same direction. >> > >> > You could be right. It could also be that a slight tilt is exaggerated >> > by the distortion of a cheap lens. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Bob >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > ----------------------------------------- > Email sent from www.ntlworld.com > Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software > Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information > > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
