Mark Roberts wrote:
Whenever I can't think of a better reason for keeping a shot than how
cheap and easy it is to do so, I know that's a photograph that isn't
worth keeping.
Needs keeping. In next year's book.
That was easy.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mai
Wow! This thread really took off while I wasn't looking.
In any event, it has been an extremely informative one. I wish I had
time to reply to each person who responded, but I do thank you all for
the many thoughtful answers. This has been a very educational thread
for me -- lots of foo
On 5/10/10, David J Brooks, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Don't listen to Frank or Cotty is a good start.
Now we know where you loyalties lie, eh Frank!
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
-- http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
Walt, here are my few pixels.
Personally, I don't do montages, collages and other digital art forms.
No specific reason except that I'd like to better myself as a
photographer, not as a graphic artist.
I don't have any specific /system/ as to how to decide which image to
save and which to di
ct images
is a waste in time and effort.
my $.02 worth.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "Walter Gilbert"
Subject: Out of curiosity: A question for the pros
As I hasten to stipulate at every opportunity, I'm
On 10/5/2010 8:47 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Larry Colen wrote:
On Oct 5, 2010, at 4:30 PM, John Francis wrote:
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 08:57:04AM +1000, Tanya Love wrote:
I know this is an opposing view to what most have posted here, but it works
for me. And when I am shooting 2-3000 frames
Just try to add an interesting background to a good foreground shot in
color in a chemical darkroom. It was difficult enough to do in B&W,
Photoshop's a snap.
On 10/5/2010 4:59 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote:
Thanks, P. J.
Good point about storage. I guess I still think of hard drive space
a
I should think that would be one of the best times to take pictures.
Pretty shots of pretty places are easy...
On 10/5/2010 6:27 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote:
The PAW project came about as a result of the same thing we tend to do here
(talk about equipment rather than taking pictures...but I blam
--
From: "Tanya Love"
Subject: RE: Out of curiosity: A question for the pros
I concur. There is no point in keeping stuff just because it is cheap to
do
so. It may only equate to 1TB per year, but it is also a whole lot of
filing, c
mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark
Roberts
Sent: Wednesday, 6 October 2010 10:47 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Out of curiosity: A question for the pros
Mark said:
Whenever I can't think of a better reason for keeping a shot than how cheap
and easy it is to do so, I
On Oct 5, 2010, at 5:47 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
>>
>> By this time next year, it'll be about half that. If my time is worth any
>> money at all, it's practically not worth the time to go through the bother
>> of deleting them.
>
> Whenever I can't think of a better reason for keeping a shot t
Larry Colen wrote:
>
>On Oct 5, 2010, at 4:30 PM, John Francis wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 08:57:04AM +1000, Tanya Love wrote:
>>>
>>> I know this is an opposing view to what most have posted here, but it works
>>> for me. And when I am shooting 2-3000 frames every week, the storage spac
On Oct 5, 2010, at 5:26 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 6 October 2010 11:03, Mark Roberts wrote:
>
>> That's a bit extreme, in my view (I find a lot of shots that didn't
>> come out as I envisaged prove quite useful later), but I delete a lot.
>> Good photographers have to be ruthless editors of
Rob Studdert wrote:
>On 6 October 2010 11:03, Mark Roberts wrote:
>
>> That's a bit extreme, in my view (I find a lot of shots that didn't
>> come out as I envisaged prove quite useful later), but I delete a lot.
>> Good photographers have to be ruthless editors of their own work.
>
>Editing does
On 6 October 2010 11:03, Mark Roberts wrote:
> That's a bit extreme, in my view (I find a lot of shots that didn't
> come out as I envisaged prove quite useful later), but I delete a lot.
> Good photographers have to be ruthless editors of their own work.
Editing does not equal deleting.
--
Ro
Tanya Love wrote:
>A great photographer who took me under his wing years ago (see
>www.chunglee.com), once said to me "the measure of a great photographer is
>the size of his/her waste paper bin".
Quite right.
>Meaning anything that isn't as
>perfect as you envisaged it should go in the bin
T
On Oct 5, 2010, at 4:30 PM, John Francis wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 08:57:04AM +1000, Tanya Love wrote:
>>
>> I know this is an opposing view to what most have posted here, but it works
>> for me. And when I am shooting 2-3000 frames every week, the storage space
>> and time it would take
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 08:57:04AM +1000, Tanya Love wrote:
>
> I know this is an opposing view to what most have posted here, but it works
> for me. And when I am shooting 2-3000 frames every week, the storage space
> and time it would take to keep the "average" shots, would be ridiculous.
2000
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 06:15:07PM -0400, David J Brooks wrote:
> Walter, I keep just about everything i shoot, unless its totally OOF
> then i'll delete it.
I regard deleting digital images much as I would regard shredding negatives;
it's an irreversible step, and one that offers no real benefits
I agree with you as a working professional, Tanya. Work one is doing
for a client, or on spec., is certainly different than the work an
artsy-fartsy photographer does (like me). With few exceptions, if it
doesn't meet the clients expectations or is not special to you for
your own portfolio,
that helps!
Tan. :)
Tanya Love
Photographer
www.lovebytes.com.au
m: 0458 006 740
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Walter Gilbert
Sent: Wednesday, 6 October 2010 3:38 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Out of curiosity: A ques
An excellent example, Mark!
I attended college in San Francisco, and had some very respected
luminaries as teachers in the craft of photography.
I was told, and remember this was in the days of film, to not expect
more than one or two good shots per roll of 35 mm.
Do not expect to get mor
The PAW project came about as a result of the same thing we tend to do here
(talk about equipment rather than taking pictures...but I blame that on
Photokina). Kyle Cassity on the Leica Users Group came up (half-jokingly) that
the LUG people should use their cameras rather than just talking abou
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 6:15 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
> Walter, I keep just about everything i shoot, unless its totally OOF
> then i'll delete it.
>
> I have a lot of photos that i consider "just a bit OOF" but find i can
> use them in the annual fair photo contest as the slight flaw does not
> s
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote:
> I see what you mean.
>
> Now, how do I learn to be GOOD? :)
Don't listen to Frank or Cotty is a good start.
Dave
>
>
> -- Walt
> On 10/5/2010 1:07 PM, Bob W wrote:
>>
>> that's how you learn to be better.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> PDML P
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Walter Gilbert wrote:
> I see what you mean.
>
> Now, how do I learn to be GOOD? :)
Don't listen to
>
>
> -- Walt
> On 10/5/2010 1:07 PM, Bob W wrote:
>>
>> that's how you learn to be better.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.ne
Walter, I keep just about everything i shoot, unless its totally OOF
then i'll delete it.
I have a lot of photos that i consider "just a bit OOF" but find i can
use them in the annual fair photo contest as the slight flaw does not
show up.
The example you have shown woudld be a forsure keeper in
I'm not too proud to say that's the greatest thing I've seen in a
long time.
And here I sat thinking that the whole "cormorant" thing was just some
simple, quirky idiosyncrasy of the PDML list. Little did I know!
Thanks for the info and the guffaw (a word which, if I'm not mistaken,
is de
Walter Gilbert wrote:
> what do all of you real photographers do with images that may
>be flawed, but still have some redeeming qualities to them. For
>instance, a shot that's too poorly focused to rescue with sharpening
>tools and so forth, but does capture a sense of action that is somewhat
can't help you with that - sorry!
>
>I see what you mean.
>
> Now, how do I learn to be GOOD? :)
>
>
> -- Walt
> On 10/5/2010 1:07 PM, Bob W wrote:
> > that's how you learn to be better.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailm
Thanks, P. J.
Good point about storage. I guess I still think of hard drive space as
coming at a rather high premium -- and also, there's the fact that I'm
not the most well-organized person in the world. I tend to scatter
copies of images in various forms hither and yon, throughout my dr
Thanks for the input, Jeffery.
I've been curious about the PAW project, having seen references to it in
subject lines on the list in the past. I just assumed it was an
individual effort. Maybe a kind soul will explain it to me sometime.
Now, I've at least put together the fact that PAW s
Thanks, John.
That's just about as close to a verbatim description of my thinking as
it gets. I have gone back over the past couple of days and found some
shots that I wonder why I didn't do something with before. The reason,
of course, is because I didn't have any idea how to make them l
I see what you mean.
Now, how do I learn to be GOOD? :)
-- Walt
On 10/5/2010 1:07 PM, Bob W wrote:
that's how you learn to be better.
Bob
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link d
From: Walter Gilbert
As I hasten to stipulate at every opportunity, I'm pretty new to
photography, and I have what may seem to be a stupid question. So,
please indulge me.
That said, what do all of you real photographers do with images that may
be flawed, but still have some redeeming qualiti
Apply some blur, some motion striping and call it art...
Hell, I seldom throw anything out, (unless it's just silly, like 100
pictures of a doorknob), storage is cheap, and you never know when a
great idea for combined images will strike you.
Somewhere on film I have a very nice photograph
I would post it and say "how do y'all like the bokeh in this shot?" Dealing
with focus and shutter lag when trying to photograph a flying bird (not to
mention my poor reflexes) have convinced me never to even try them with my
current equipment. So, you'll never hear me criticizing another one's
> As I hasten to stipulate at every opportunity, I'm pretty new to
> photography, and I have what may seem to be a stupid question. So, please
> indulge me.
>
> That said, what do all of you real photographers do with images that may
be
> flawed, but still have some redeeming qualities to them.
As I hasten to stipulate at every opportunity, I'm pretty new to
photography, and I have what may seem to be a stupid question. So,
please indulge me.
That said, what do all of you real photographers do with images that may
be flawed, but still have some redeeming qualities to them. For
in
39 matches
Mail list logo
