Dick, Letters after a name do not make someone unable to see the advantage in some situations of using a digital camera without movements,in this instance a Kodak Pro, for Architecture. A good practitioner will choose the tool that does the job to the standard required. Its not difficult to adjust the image afterwards in Photoshop. I'm delighted with the Kodak so much so that im selling all my film cameras Hasselblads, 5x4 and 120 Monorails, scan back etc on ebay shortly. Don't underestimate the Pro,s image quality, its very good. FBIPP after ones name does not make them a better practitioner than someone not a member of the BIPP nor does it make them better than someone with lesser qualifications
Regards Michael Wilkinson. 106 Holyhead Rd, Ketley, Telford, Shropshire. England .TF1 5DJ 44 (0) 1952 618986. www.infocus-photography.co.uk For Negatives & transparencies from digital files ____________________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "DICK ROADNIGHT" > I think the DCS is a good cost effective replacement for a 35mm film camera for amateurs, > journalists, wildlife photographers, weddings, fashion etc., but I could not imagine > an FBIPP > using one for architecture - =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
