Please understand I am in no way trying to undermine the professionalism of our photographers and am talking expressly about our freelancers and not agents taking snap shots, they are not my concern at present.
We are not trying to find a quick, cheap fix, we are top end of the market and want to improve on that, not go the other way. I am just trying to understand the issues and possible costs involved. I will not be passing half baked ideas to them or insisting anyone converts to digi when they are not ready to do so. I just want to learn what I can in the time I have, and point them in the right direction. Please remember I am at the beginning of the learning curve. Sorry if I came across as a cowboy. You feisty bunch! Apologies for the disclaimer I will be re-registering under hotmail (as its a legal requirement to have it though my work email) when I get the chance, but wanted to get this posted quick. Jackie -----Original Message----- From: Mike Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 30 July 2003 10:27 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PRODIG] changing over to digi costs At 6:15 pm +0100 29/7/03, Michael Harvey wrote: >I find it hard to believe that we've just spent the last two weeks talking >up the use of D60's or equivalent to produce 50Mb and above images, only to >see us pulling it all down this week; ironic. I don't think it was file size that was the issue in this thread, more the question raised by Richard relating to architectural photography. I for one can't see a sub �1000 solution that would incorporate either a monorail or a decent perspective control lens. But the underlying and unspoken issue is probably that most subscribers to this list will have interpreted, rightly or wrongly, this question by Jackie as being another alert that a company currently commissioning photographers is reckoning that technology can allow them to dispense with their skills, replacing them with a one off hardware item that can be carried around in a negotiator's glovebox. I could be very wrong here, and it's why I suggested: >Maybe Jackie needs to be more specific about the type of photography >and why they want to go digital at all. It is important. I really can't see why snaps in an estate agent's window should require them to hire a photographer, anyone can do it. However I'd be sad to see the skilled and high end architectural and interior photography disappear because some suit in a city office couldn't tell the difference. Mike Russell -- Mouse in the House, London http://www.mouseinthehouse.co.uk =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE NOTICE: This email is intended for the named recipient only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, notify the sender immediately and destroy this email. You must not copy, distribute or take action in reliance upon it. Whilst all efforts are made to safeguard emails, the Savills Group cannot guarantee that attachments are virus free or compatible with your systems and does not accept liability in respect of viruses or computer problems experienced. The Savills Group reserves the right to monitor all email communications through its internal and external networks. =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
