Sorry - the version of this post I posted recently was a draft - please ignore. I blame my computer, but I do not expect you to believe me - when I get the post right, my system refuses to send it!
Being a "has been" technical author, I do try to get my post right before I post them. Richard thought "Specialist photo Markets" was not digital enough, so Bob re-christened it "Digital Technical Challenges". I think we hope Digital will provide solutions rather that challenges! Perhaps this should have been several threads - please use the PARAGRAPH HEADINGS as topic thread titles for reply. LEARNING CURVE >Digital puts one on a short learning curve for technically difficult >Shots. If one rates exposure, focus, Perspective etc as technically >difficult. Exposure and DOF can be a technical problem especially for macro, and the sharpness readout on the pro-backs saves time and hassle for interiors, pack shots etc. >When it comes to shots that are truly technically... then the challenges >can be as great they have always been... Whatever you try to get the right result, for the inexperienced, it is nice, at the end of the day, to know you have a usable result. I have illustrated a few books on domestic fowl and waterfowl, and you have to press the button... and then wonder is you caught the pose: If you only use one in five or ten shots, the economics of digital are important - I wanted to do the job with MF (for posters and agencies), but the initial requirement was only half A5 illustrations. Stopping bullets, ballet dancers, vaulters and gymnasts in the right part of the frame can also take some error and trial. FLATNESS >When I first started in photography it was "film will never replace plates >entirely, 'cos it ain't flat!!" >Can a digital sensor compare with a plate? The flatness of CCDs is a great advantage over sheet film and rollfilm backs, but un-flatness is a big problem with UWA LF lenses, where CCDs cannot cope with the light incident angle of no-retro UWA LF lenses. BACKPACKING Neill Watson (not far from Roseberry Topping....) wrote: >One of the few photographers whose work I admire is Joe Cornish - I wonder >if he has contemplated digital. Yes, he's ever so slightly brilliant. In >this digital age, however, if there's one application where film is still >best, it's probably that one. Can you imagine lugging a scanning back up >the side of Roseberry Topping in the snow before dawn to get the images he >does? One of the advantages of some digital systems is that you get more res/Kg: Backpacking a Sinar 54H may not appeal, but surely a comprehensive digital monorail or view camera system with 35mm lenses would be lighter than the equivalent LF system? Digitally irrelevant it may be, but my father proposed to my mother in the shadow of Roseberry Topping, in the thirties. =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
