Maybe they are checking to see if they got the shot. Are the film shooters so great that they don't need to check if eyes are open, or dopey expressions are in the frame? Seems like a big reach to say, "We do it right the first time, every time! No need to check." Regards, Bob S.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Paul Sorenson <[email protected]> wrote: > According to the web site of one local wedding shooter. He says... > > *"Film or Digital? Don't be fooled - newer isn't always better. Digital is > wonderful in the studio - under controlled lighting and from short distances > - but definitely is not suitable for weddings. Digital is finicky and > requires precision exposure that is difficult to attain under the wide > variety of conditions and involved in wedding coverage. Basically, digital > wedding photographers are always adjusting their cameras and reviewing their > work when they should be taking pictures. At this point, digital simply is > too risky. Many studios have switched to digital for one reason - to save > money - whereas we don't mind paying a little extra for the quality and > consistency of film. We can provide you with all of the "special effects" > and retouches being touted by digital wedding photographers."* > > He does admit that MF is dead 'cause all his shooters use 35mm. > > Food for thought... > > -p > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
