Dear All, Thanks for all the excellent advice. I've now done the job. The thing that I found was that, apart from being much easier than shooting endless polaroids and very simple to get onto my G4, the images appeared to be much more underexposed on my desktop than in the camera's viewer.
It was surprisingly easy to manipulate them in RAW though to get the exposure and colour temperature that I wanted. I'd approached digital with the view that, as it was to do with maths, there would be many more"absolutes" in terms of procedure and the way images were produced and manipulated. I find it fascinating that there are still so many variations in working practice. The chemical process, which is what I've been using for all my working life, was all about pushing the limits of "what might happen if" (temperature, processing times, different films etc etc) to get the most out of the technology to make our images as peculiar to us as possible. Just reading this morning's two threads (mine and de-sampling) has been interesting for those very reasons. Thanks again, Simon Buckley =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
