Dear David,

If you notice with the test on dpreview he tries to shoot the same
subject at the same time of day a lot of the time. So its not judged on
aesthetic value rather on extreme and normal shooting conditions. This
gives us a better idea of judging quality. 

"The bloke next door who's just picked up 64k on the old lottery/who
wants to be a millionaire. Got himself the latest full frame something
or other. 2gig multi processor stainless steel housed whotsit, all the
cards & lenses. Full on p/shop"


I feel sad you feel that way. The difference between us lot and the guy
above is what sells us is we have the eye, composition and knowledge.
Now with digital imho, I think it's a great leap forward as now we have
total control from brain to paper, via a computer. Now In my view that
allows us to be called true artists. Artists have total control and
visualization over their materials. Gone are the days when you fropped
you neg film in and got a questionable colour and exposure time on your
prints.

Surely moire hands on = better photography. Yes I too like tri-x but
really, but since I moved to digital I feel my production rate has gone
up, and in tern my learning curve is constantly improving, a longer
process surely with film imho.

Just a minor rant.

peace    

Ian Reynolds



===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE

Reply via email to