The BS of Digital Photography
cakaltm at gmail.com
Tue Oct 6 03:50:28 EDT 2009
Certainly! Whenever I attempt to venture back to film, I can't seem
to seriously do it (regardless of how much I enjoy the smell of a
freshly open film canster).
Cost of film and developing seem like an afterthought almost, because
it didn't really bother me then (I also think what is my own time
I'm not suggesting I would return to film... extremely hard to do...
I'm just wondering because it seems I do a lot more work with digital.
Maybe in the same vein as computers. Back when we didn't have PC's (I
had Atari's and Commodore's and before/during that worked in the
mainframe world), a Technical Services department would solve all the
stupid issues and I would only worry about my own application
programs. Now I must be tech services, data base admin, etc., +
photographer... blah, blah, blah... :-)
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Malcolm Smith
<malcolmsmith1 at btinternet.com> wrote:
> Two quick points:
> Cost. Pure and simple the cost of film purchase and development makes
> digital capture right for 90%+ of my photography.
> E6 - I've always seen this as a different animal. Whilst it is available, it
> is an 'as well as'.
> I've always had issues with film or digital for certain uses and this is my
> simple way of resolving it.
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML at pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
More information about the PDML