The success of many of my pictures depends on setting my alarm clock. I've never had anyone ask what make of alarm clock I use. (I was once introduced to what became a very good client after I had told a story about how I got a convoy of trucks into the Saudi Arabian desert before dawn. None of the drivers was paid extra!) Of course it is no good getting there if you don't know what to do when you get there.
When I was still a student Pete Turner (the American one) told me something like. "Photography starts when 1/128 @ f8 ends".
Surely the situation with digital capture is that it is much quicker to see whether a picture 'cuts the mustard' or not. Doesn't this separate the good from the bad at an earlier stage in the process?
For me there is something extra working with digital files. I can control want I want in the image to a far greater degree. However this has nothing whatsoever to do with the equipment and everything to do with how I want to use the visual elements in the picture. Anyone without that wont be helped by all the equipment in the world.
Regards
Bob Croxford
On 1 Apr 2004, at 14:54, Andrew Lopez-Calvete wrote:
The only thing that marks us 'pro' smudgers out from punters with digital compacts is the price and complexity of our toys.
Calvers
(Sorry having one of those days)
=============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
