WW Penned
The last time I judged a contest, the digital thing was a PITA. I am no
longer a member in good standing of any camera club, but were I, the club
would treat any digitized image , no matter if the original was a negative
or a tiff, separately
The last time I judged a contest, the digital thing was a PITA. I am no
longer a member in good standing of any camera club, but were I, the
club
would treat any digitized image , no matter if the original was a
negative
or a tiff, separately from an optically produced image.
My feeling
You're absolutely right, Dag,
That's why I said that in many cases, digital is easier to manipulate than
film. But, no doubt about it, one can do lots of surprising with film, as
the shots you posted well show.
Very cool, BTW! Thanks.
cheers,
frank
The optimist thinks this is the best of
. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: Bill D. Casselberry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: interesting camera club debate
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:34:52 -0800
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
And what's to prevent the photographer using film to make
several
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
But subjects
move, light changes, and a good photog knows if he's got the
shot.
A point I made earlier. But...
You would know why. I have often taken a 35mm film Camera out and taken
pictures which I knew would come out right. I have often taken some which I
felt
As to whether digital and film should be judged separately, I really don't
care. It's up to the club or those holding the competition to make the
rules, and those who wish to enter either abide by those rules, or not.
Personally, I've never been a big fan of art competitions anyway, whether
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: interesting camera club debate
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 17:52:34 -0500
As to whether digital and film should be judged separately, I really don't
care. It's up to the club or those holding
The only photo club that I've belonged to (http://www.groupf56.com)
didn't allow conversations about gear or equipment at the official
meetings (people did talk about it afterwords). Photographs were
evaluated on the final results, not what means were used to take them.
It is an interesting
frank theriault wrote:
As to whether digital and film should be judged separately, I
really don't care.
Hmm! I think I do; with digital you can review immediately what you have
taken - if you don't like it on some occasions the moment may not have
passed and you can take the shot again. With
And what's to prevent the photographer using film to make several exposures of
the same subject, bracketing the exposure, shooting from different points of
view, even using different cameras with different films.
Malcolm Smith wrote:
Hmm! I think I do; with digital you can review immediately
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
And what's to prevent the photographer using film to make
several exposures of the same subject, bracketing the
exposure, shooting from different points of view, even using
different cameras with different films.
Whoo! Another advantage to the digital user, he won't
Well, then, color me crazy ... LOL
One continually reads how the LCD and histogram of the digital camera
allows the photographer to immediately see the results of the exposure,
and, if need be, make another, and that's a valid point ... as far as it
goes. But subjects move, light changes, and a
12 matches
Mail list logo
