Michael Wilkinson wrote on 30th July,2003 in response to Paul's posting: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Tansley" ,> > > . Or, simply upgrade the laptop. A laptop with firewire connection > > can be had for well under a grand. And for the savings in time, would be > > well worth it. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~# > > Sadly throwing another grand at a problem is taken as normal in this digital age and it > makes me see red ( As in overdraft ). > If you kit is satisfactory when you buy it why does it develop an unsatisfactory bias so > soon. > We are so damned impatient. > E6 process still takes the same time as it did 10 years ago,what's the problem with > everyone? > We are so used to moving things along quickly its taken over our lives,we worry about it > all the time. > Even when your computer is working fine you dream of something with bigger hard drives > ,faster CPUs, more ram etc. > STOP. > Sit back and enjoy your image making. > If its taking 20 minutes instead of 10 do some yoga or relaxation therapy and enjoy living > a bit longer.
Thank God , there are some sane people on this list ! Have often wondered reading the post of some of the most prolific writers on this list: they are all seem to be in a great hurry to achieve results. Where is the rush ? Is life that short ? Six weeks ago I acquired my first digital camera, Minolta's Dimage 7Hi, for doing my personal art-photography. Got a card reader, not because it would give a faster transfer rate than transfering directly from the camera but, simply because the camera is a battery guzzler. Also, the idea of the cells dying during a transfer, causing possible damage to the card, isn't very appealing. Oh yeah! As of now I have USB 1.0. Seems fast enough for me for now. Added an 80GB HD to cope with the 70MB+ panaromics I am doing. Will have to upgrade my old faithful P3 to a P4 soon, but I am not in a tremendous hurry. Right now, I am getting to know the little 'black beauty', which is certainly feature rich for its class. Getting back to digital: I have a problem with the camera. Is it correct that an image created by a CCD has a wider exposure latitude than film ? If so, why do highlights seem to blow out in outdoor shots on an overcast day if one exposes for the darker greeneries ? There is flare where the dark foliage meet the bright sky. Is it a limitation of the lens, or limitation of the digital system? Having read so many reviews praising the sharpness of the lens and its general quality I doubt its incapability. Am I doing something wrong? The only alternative I see is to shoot at two different exposures and then judiciusly merge the images later. A bit impractical for the panaromics. Any advice, except the rude and cocky ones, will be very welcome. Many thanks. Swapan Mukherjee =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
