----- "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... >
Bologna -- 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.
