[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I meant to post this last week, but I don't think I got around to it ... > > My ex-housemate hasn't removed the last of his stuff, and he said I > could use his computer & scanner until he takes them away (my scanners > don't have transparency adaptors, his is a Canoscan LiDE 600F) so I've > been scanning lots of old negatives and the occasional unmounted roll > of slide film and burning things to CD, not particularly prioritising, > (beyond reaching for rolls that I'd only ever gotten contact sheets > made from before ones that I've already had printed), just getting > through as many rolls as I can manage to do before I run out of time, > momentum, or blank CDs. > > Consequently, I've been looking at a lot of images from 1997-2004, > and although (or maybe because?) I'm flipping through the scans > relatively quickly, I'm starting to note patterns in which of the > things I tend to try really work, and which I should remind myself > not to do any more. > > The biggest lesson I've learned from this exercise so far is more > obvious than any other pattern I've noticed, and a very simple, if > not inexpensive, adjustment to my shooting style: > > I should really use infrared film a lot more often. > > > > > (Hmm. While I was writing this, there was a zzzZZZIIIP*THUD*, the > rather distinctive sound of a two-car collision on a rain-slick > street. The police showed up a lot more quickly than any of the > other times I've called 911. Both drivers are ambulatory, *whew*. > This has, of course, nothing at all to do with the rest of this > message.) > > -- Glenn > >
Sounds like a photo op to me, Glenn. D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
