Digital Image Studio wrote:
On 23/01/07, Mark Cassino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That was about all my budget could handle and it simply was not
enough for serious stock shooting (back when there was a viable market
for stock photos.)
I'd be interested if you could expand a bit further on your
I've done fairly well selling royalty free stock. At the very least I've paid
for my last two digital SLRs and a few lenses to boot. But the micro stock
agencies could change that.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Digital Image
On 25/01/07, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's a very interesting article on the state of the stock photo
business:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/micro-payment.shtml
I wouldn't even consider getting into the stock photo business (as a
photographer, anyway - as an
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Mark Cassino
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 12:46 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: A little *ist D statistics
Jens Bladt wrote:
Hello All
Since I am soon to receive my K10D, which will partly
Gentlemen, there has to be a distinction made. It would be only
logical that the whole way of thinking of a person sells their
photographs and a person who is pure hobbyist are two totally
different kettles of fish.
I made similar calc with my *istD. I see very little value in making
this kind of
All I can tell you, Boris, is that when I was doing photography as a
hobby through the 1990s and into 2001, I was spending as much as
$2000 a year on film and processing. Moving to digital cameras in
2002 as my primary capture freed up a lot of my money (and time!) to
do more photography.
Yes, I can relate to that. When I owned my cars (I mean not work
provided cars) I also recorded the expenses. I did not record my
expenses when I was shooting film 3 years ago.
I agree that going digital saves money spent on processing and film.
But then again I had to buy some DVDs, and then
: A little *ist D statistics
Jens Bladt wrote:
Hello All
Since I am soon to receive my K10D, which will partly replace my *ist D, I
guess a little statistics is in it's place.
I suspect your math is pretty much on the mark. I just noticed that the
counter on my *ist-D has turned over again
I would like to point out that you would have gotten a large discount on
film and processing if you had prepaid a thousand bucks or so in
advance, which is what you in effect did by buying a digital camera.
-graywolf
Boris Liberman wrote:
Yes, I can relate to that. When I owned my cars (I
BS.
I bought both film and processing chemistry in bulk quantities to
minimize cost per roll, did all the BW traditional negative
processing, and only had films processed through C41 to negatives at
$2.50 per 36exp roll of 35mm, or about $4 per roll of 120 format.
Printing is not included
Tom, it is probably correct for where you live, but not here.
graywolf wrote:
I would like to point out that you would have gotten a large discount on
film and processing if you had prepaid a thousand bucks or so in
advance, which is what you in effect did by buying a digital camera.
On 23/01/07, Mark Cassino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That was about all my budget could handle and it simply was not
enough for serious stock shooting (back when there was a viable market
for stock photos.)
Hi Mark,
I'd be interested if you could expand a bit further on your statement
above,
I didn't do the math on my D. If I would I should also calculate the
costs of my Lens Buying Addiction which exceeds the istD price.
The D was the primary infection resulting in my LBA :)
Toine
On 1/21/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello All
Since I am soon to receive my K10D, which
I have no idea how I can check the exact amount of shutter actuation
which occured from my D. Is there an EXIF tag somewhere ?
2007/1/22, Toine [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I didn't do the math on my D. If I would I should also calculate the
costs of my Lens Buying Addiction which exceeds the istD
From: Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/01/22 Mon AM 10:47:27 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: A little *ist D statistics
I have no idea how I can check the exact amount of shutter actuation
which occured from my D. Is there an EXIF tag somewhere
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: A little *ist D statistics
Hello All
Since I am soon to receive my K10D, which will partly replace my *ist D, I
guess a little statistics is in it's place.
I had it for 29 months.
I did 45000 shots
I paid app.. 1180 USD incl. CF-cards, for it.
That's the total
Jens Bladt wrote:
Hello All
Since I am soon to receive my K10D, which will partly replace my *ist D, I
guess a little statistics is in it's place.
I suspect your math is pretty much on the mark. I just noticed that the
counter on my *ist-D has turned over again, and I have to go back and
Hello All
Since I am soon to receive my K10D, which will partly replace my *ist D, I
guess a little statistics is in it's place.
I had it for 29 months.
I did 45000 shots
I paid app.. 1180 USD incl. CF-cards, for it.
That's the total cost - just about.
That's in average 52 shots every day.
Each
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 21. januar 2007 09:26
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: A little *ist D statistics
Hello All
Since I am soon to receive my K10D, which will partly replace my *ist D, I
guess a little statistics is in it's place.
I had it for 29 months.
I did 45000 shots
I paid
Jens Bladt wrote:
If I had used film and my MZ-S this figuring would have been very
different:
I would have taken only 33 % of the number of shots = 15.000 shots
I would have been able to use the camera for 29 more months before it got
obsolete, reducing the cost of the camera to 50%.
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Jens Bladt
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 7:55 AM
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: RE: A little *ist D statistics
Small error:
Cost pr image done with *ist D is of course only 0.04 USD. Regards
Jens Bladt
Nytarkort / Greeting Card:
http://www.jensbladt.dk
I hear ya Jens! I have had my DL for about 13 months, and shot ~2400
frames (only 6 shots per day :(, but I guarantee that I could not have
afforded to shoot that much film. I never got into photography
because I could not afford it, then one day I called a shop that had
some DL's on 30% off:
22 matches
Mail list logo
