Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 83

Thread: Photography?

  1. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default

    Originally posted by StreetShooter
    Hey, guess what I took today with my old Russian manual focus pinhole camera? Art, isn't it? No digital camera could possibly have taken this shot!
    wat? u didn't make your own pinhole?

    i'm sorry to inform you that REAL photographers make their own pinhole cameras instead of buying from Russia
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  2. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default Okay Serious Post

    Serious Post:

    Leonard, Ckiang said this in jest, but I am deadly serious. You sound like the kind of person who should be using large format rather than 35mm. The quality is undeniably light years ahead of 35mm film, let alone digital. There is that same wait for pics to come back/be developed. More importantly, the mentality of using one is great. It will make your mentality of using a 35mm manual slr seem like you were using a digital camera, which you really shouldn't be adopting. Yes, I own one and use one, so I know what I'm talking about.

    OTOH, if you cannot be bothered to use LF, then at least go MF. Again, the quality is superior, and you have to slow down with a more focused mentality. And it also does make 35mm look like toys, just like 35mm manual stuff makes digital look like toys.
    Give it a spin, let me know the result. Some people are converted and never touch 35mm again.
    BTW, while it would be nice to see your work, you miss the point. Just because you make good photographs (and all power to you!) doesn't give you the power to suggest that everybody else can't.

  3. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default Even More Serious

    Legal Implications (okay, not that bad, don't switch off)

    Photographs are protected by copyright. It is considered by the law to be an artistic medium. However, photographs don't sit comfortably within copyright law because of their nature.

    As in, to have copyright, there must exist skill and labour in the creation of that piece of work. The painter take days or longer to finish his masterpiece, same for the scultor, the writer, etc. On the other hand a lot of photographers take their pictures in a second. I've always wondered, would a painter think less highly of me because his landscape took weeks to finish whereas mine took 1/250 of a second to complete? Would a layman think any less highly of my photograph, assuming equal artistic merit, if it took 1/250s to complete rather than several weeks?

    I often hear comments about images that are dismissed as a work of art because "it's easy to create the effect in Photoshop in seconds". (Note that's why I use the word image rather than photograph.) But my comeback is simply that it shouldn't matter how long it takes to achieve in Photoshop, whether it's a single filter or a multitude of filters with a busload of layers and masks. It's the final result that matters. The means don't have to justify the ends. If the image is good, it's good. Doesn't matter if it was painted with blood, or simulated with Photoshop, or copied with a camera.

    Which brings me nicely to my next point about copyright and photography. Photography is essentially a method of copying something. You are copying something already in existence, whether it be a design of a watch, a building... a layout arranged by nature. So where's the skill and labour in that? Where's the creative spark?

    But I prattle on. I've lost Leonard's argument, to be honest, and I've no idea whether it is focused on digital photography being crap, digital photographers being crap, or what. But I can confidently say that digital photography is not crap, because quality wise, he can shoot with his 35mm camera and I'll use my digital and quality wise, we'll get at least as good pictures. If I wanted to crow quality, yes I'd pull my MF and my LF out. As to digital photographers being crap, my explanation as before was that there are digital photographers now who would never be photographers otherwise. Those who were enthusiasts in the old sense of the word have never died to their roots. Far from losing the old traditionalists, we have gained a new group. They may all still be in the infancy stage as far as technique and experience are concerned, but at the end of the day, if we gain ONE accomplished photographer from their midst it would still be a bonus, because as I am at pains to stress, they wouldn't be the least interested in photography if it were not for digital.

    Yes, quite likely this was a troll. The average troll is fun, and this has been no different. Leonard, you sound like you think you take good pictures. Good. I hope you have fun continuing to make pictures whichever way you know best. It's none of my business should I eventually see your work if it's good or bad, and I should think I would have the decency to shut up and not say anything if I think it's rubbish. But good luck in your shooting, and may it give you happiness.

    To the rest of you, I leave you with one of Leonard's points because I agree with him. I stated that I believe the average amateur in Singapore does not take as good pictures as the average amateur in the UK for example. Sad, but true. So my plea to everyone on this forum is to think before you shoot. There is no reason why the Brits are more creative than the people at home. Rather than just point and shoot and sort them out later (borrowed from Darren's poll), point and think and shoot. At the risk of offending anyone specifically, don't just see an object and say, that would make a good picture, and take the picture. I have little interest in seeing an isolated object, unless that object is VERY peculiar and worthy of interest. Think about how that object interacts with its surroundings, how the light catches it, etc. And try to convey all that in your shots.

    And yes, to this group as well, good shooting. It's again none of my business to tell you if I think your stuff is bad, but I might offer some advice if I think your work can be improved. Ultimately, if you're happy with what you've taken, then it shouldn't matter what I say or Leonard says (and hopefully I won't say anything) or anyone else says. As I said above, good luck in your shooting, and may it bring you happiness.

  4. #64

    Default everyone like to be lazy

    OK guys, relax.


    wat is right, wat is wrong?

    Many years ago, before email. I used to wrote to my pan-pal in Australia, I always wait for the moment she replied my mail.

    Now, with email. Do we care more or less?

    With forums all over the internet, how many of you really compose as formal as your were in school?

    Pocket PC/Digital Diary : Forget your password? Don't worry, you got a walking "brain".

    Dictionary: Wat is that? Use MS Word ( My colleague told me that when I asked her a word.)

    Video Tape Player : LOL, you can't be using that. Most using VCD/DVD nowaday. Can't bother with rewinding tape.

    Flim Camera : processing flim? wat? 2 days? wat? close at 7 PM?

    DIgital Camera : point and shoot.

    What I am trying to sayis that technology makes us lazy, but it DOES NOT necessary mean the person who uses it never think before he do something with it. For example again :

    Forum : some actually think before he type, he really check his spelling and vocab or grammer.

    Dictionary : Some carrying it but in digital format, will refer to it when writing letters.

    VCD/DVD : yes, it is cheap, but I don't buy lousy film.

    Digital Camera : some do think before they shoot, i saw it with my own eyes.


    So as far as I am concern, technology makes our life better

    Wat do u think?


    ps : don't flame me, just my $0.02
    Objection !!!

  5. #65

    Default

    Yeah, good advice, Jed.

    Someone once asked in a newsgroup (which I followed when I first got my CP700):
    "I'm trying to find out how I can improve my photos."

    A guy named Roland Karlsson gave such a good reply that I saved it in my email folder. It's dated Oct 2000:

    I have found that the best way of improving your
    photos is to look at good photographers photos
    and your own photos very carefully. Whats the
    difference? How can you improve? What are your
    strenghts and weaknesses. What do you want to
    say with your photos? What makes a photo beautiful
    or impressive? What make a photo worth more
    than thousand words.

    Composition - get closer! Try to look at the subject
    unfocused and try to find patterns, diagonals,
    surfaces, etc. Move around - don't use the zoom
    all the time when you want to change the view.

    Be careful about the background. Move until your subject
    has a simpler and more abstract background. Look out for
    things sticking out of the head of your subject. Often I try
    to avoid sky or other bright parts in the background.

    Lightning - low sun is dramatic. Backlight might
    be nice. Daylight through leaves is quite nice.
    Flash right on - no - maybe as a fun effect - or
    as a fill in to remove shadows. Reflections in water
    or bright walls in an alley.

    Rain! When everything is wet you can get wounderful pictures.
    Fog and mist - not bad at all. New snow on tree branches!
    Early morning moisture in a spider web. A nature photographer
    must learn to read the weather. Right now in Sweden -
    autumn leaves.

    Colors - oh I am really a B&W photographer. I try to
    decrease the number of colors in my pictures. I think that
    too much colors takes away the interest from the content
    of the photo, makes the photos hard to appreciate.

    Abstract pictures. Wherever I take my digital camera I see
    desktop pictures. Walls, the ground, everywhere. I have a
    new nice desktop every day. Learns you to find patterns.

    Roland
    Last edited by StreetShooter; 8th February 2002 at 08:02 PM.

  6. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default Re: Okay Serious Post

    Originally posted by Jed
    Serious Post:

    Leonard, Ckiang said this in jest, but I am deadly serious. You sound like the kind of person who should be using large format rather than 35mm. The quality is undeniably light years ahead of 35mm film, let alone digital. There is that same wait for pics to come back/be developed. More importantly, the mentality of using one is great. It will make your mentality of using a 35mm manual slr seem like you were using a digital camera, which you really shouldn't be adopting. Yes, I own one and use one, so I know what I'm talking about.

    OTOH, if you cannot be bothered to use LF, then at least go MF. Again, the quality is superior, and you have to slow down with a more focused mentality. And it also does make 35mm look like toys, just like 35mm manual stuff makes digital look like toys.
    Give it a spin, let me know the result. Some people are converted and never touch 35mm again.
    BTW, while it would be nice to see your work, you miss the point. Just because you make good photographs (and all power to you!) doesn't give you the power to suggest that everybody else can't.
    As a matter of fact, I managed to borrow a Mamiya RB67 to do some group shots of my department, along with a pair of studio strobes + umbrellas. Dramatically slows you down - Compose, flip up the magnifier, focus, compose, measure the flash output, set aperture, etc. Recompose. Refocus. Shoot.

    Big hassle, but the output - wow. The tonality is great, sharpness is excellent. If not for it's bulk, the lack of a strap on that unit I used, and not having a reflected light meter which can be used outdoors (I don't quite want to bring an SLR along just for that), I'd probably borrow it to shoot some outdoor scenes. Then maybe I'll do just that when I get the chance to. Kinda fun sometimes to leave automation behind. Then I better hope I don't get hooked to MF....

    Regards
    CK

  7. #67
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Bukit Batok West Avenue 2
    Posts
    1,734

    Default

    Right, everyone need to relax or this will become dpreview's forum with users of different makes of camera hitting each other.

    Shoot, no good dump. I believe many digital photographers don't really do that after they have gone on a few sessions. You are potentially dumping a good image. Unless, you are taking candid or just fun images. The 2 inch LCD just isn't good enough to let to note the whole effect of the image.

    So, personally how do I use the LCD? With only 3 months of experience, I use them to check the exposure, and learn. I can sit in a playground or park 10 pm in the night, shooting with different settings, flash compensation, shutter speed. This way I learn the limitation of my camera, get familiar with its controls and learn of bugs and irritating problems, like why doesn't the stupid cable release of my camera trips the shutter?!?!?! And perhaps find out way to go around them. My camera requires tripping two circuits to release the shutter, the problem of my shutter release is that the half-shutter position isn't well defined, when I have half-shuttered, and is waiting for the right moment, I tend to put more and more pressure onto the release, and end up in a postion between the half-shutter and full shutter, the cable switch doesn't recognise this and when I jam down the release, only one of the ciruit is triped, not two and the shutter wouldn't release... this is just one of the problem I've studied and understood. And there's also the new flash unit i'm learning. If not for the convinence of digital, Perhaps I wouldn't have learned the advantages of bounce flash and the disadvantage of direct on flash until 2 months later for I wouldn't dare to try with the little amount of money I have as a student. And with the little amount of money I have, I guess I wouldn't even venture into abstract and spend 10 minutes with my camera pointing at a wall.

    And without the convenience of the digital camera, I'll have no image for my project for all would be under exposed and will not capture the small contrast difference between the bacteria colonies and the growth medium.

    Art, yes photography is an art, I agree. But perhaps not all the time. Tell someone with a camera at a BBQ shooting fun moments that it is an art. Or when i'm shooting images of bacteria colonies on petri dishes that placing the subject off to a side using rules of the third may make my image more interesting. Sometimes, what that is wanted is not an artistic image. The guy at the BBQ just want to have images that will allow them all to remember the fun moments they have together, underexposure due to weak flash or things sticking ourt of heads may not bother him. I just want to show the viewer of my pic the effect of antibiotics on the growth of bacteria and Try to catch all the essential information on the image is my priority. My lecturers would be more interested in the zone of inhibition rather than an abstract image of white dots on a black background. So personally, i feel that a good images does not really requires good artistic value. A good image is one that perform the job and bring across the message that the image maker wants.

    Just my $0.02
    Last edited by Flare; 9th February 2002 at 12:24 AM.

  8. #68

    Default Re: Re: to each his own

    Originally posted by Red Dawn


    the same diehards that exist in many other disciplines.

    u talking abt me?

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default Re: Re: Re: to each his own

    Originally posted by DieHarder


    u talking abt me?
    Haha......nope!
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  10. #70
    langzi
    Guests

    Default sorrie man...

    hi guys...sorrie if i've said something offending...but with reference to someone who said that i think im a photography god, im not. im still learning from each shot, andi know that no matter how many rolls i shoot, there will be more for me to learn in the next shot.

    IMHO, i think that a photographer should accept other's comments and criticism willingly, whether they are good or bad, whether they are correct or not. just my opinion. ppl dont hafta follow it.

    i am not flaming digital users, but just that maybe some of you are right. i am just to stubborn to change my mentality. i was brought into photography by a manual SLR that was probably older then me, then to my first wife, EOS 88 and then my 2nd wife and current love, EOS 300. maybe this is the reason why i find it hard to change my mentality. some photographers who started off with digital cam will have a different type of mentality bout photography i presume. well, too bad i can't use big words like others, otherwise i'll be using them.

    to those who said that i probobly neva played or toyed around with photoshop, well, you dont know me, so how can you make that statement?
    ouch...been using PS 5...now using 5.5...still going on...
    but, i only use PS to create or alter images for my PC backgrnd. my backgrnd is the avatar you are seeing...original is not like that.
    but stil, i will not put away the thought of using photoshop to digitally alter my images in the future. who knows?

    to all, i am sorrie if i've offended you in some ways or another, and oh yah, your digital cam that allows you to take terrific pics and also sorrie to your photoshop, whom i've said to be only for professionals and not for people who can't take a pic properly and hafta use PS to alter it. sorrie to you all.

    cheers,
    leonard

  11. #71
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,659

    Default Re: Photography?

    Originally posted by langzi
    dear all,
    after a few weeks at clubsnap, this is my humble opinion about the photographers here.
    IMHO, the photographers here are mainly digital cam users. IMHO, i think that going digital is one of the worst mistakes made in photography. with digital, you can forget about the settings and such, and anyhow take your pics. then preview it on the LCD screen. no good? trash it, then take it again. what is the meaning of photography then? i think that all that 90% of photographers who used digital to shoot and won prizes, that is luck. give them the same scenerio and a manual SLR, and maybe you'll get to see a over/under exposed pic. they have relyed too far on the P mode on most digital cam. this only applies to 90% of digital cam users, ok?
    in fact, most SLR users now, holding on to the auto SLR, like EOS 33 or otherwise, still uses the P mode. i think they would fare better with a compact cam.
    the advance of tech also made photographers nowadays care less bout the exposure. they think that with PhotoShop, they can alter the brightness and contrast easily. but still,we need photoshop for effects for commercial, but as for personal use, it is a privilege.
    gone have the days when photographers would care about the exposure.
    gone are the days when photographers would carefully plan ther shots, fearing that they would run outta film.
    digital killed photography.

    cheers,
    leonard
    Sounds more like a flame bait rather than goodwill comments or constructive criticism. Groundless statement like "digital killed photography" is only an invitation for rebuttal.

    i am just to stubborn to change my mentality.[/QUOTE]

    Like I said, it doesn't matter to us if you don't change your mentality, just be accomodating and let others have a go at photography regardless of what medium they use.

    to those who said that i probobly neva played or toyed around with photoshop, well, you dont know me, so how can you make that statement?[/QUOTE]

    Maybe you're an expert in Photoshop but look at the you own message. It only revealed a simplistic understanding of Photoshop. Perhaps you were selling youself short? Only you know. Think that was an unfair statement against you? Think how digital photographers feel after reading your first message. You don't even know them, so how can you pass judgement on how they should use their cameras? Most slr users still using P mode? How did you come to that conclusion? You did a survey? How many photographers did your survey cover? If indeed they were using P mode, what business is that of yours?

    You might have meant constructive when you started this thread but you words weren't working in your favour if it was meant this way.

  12. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default Re: sorrie man...

    To Leonard:

    The following post is intending well, and there is no ill-feeling anywhere in it, and I hope you will read it as such.

    Originally posted by langzi

    im still learning from each shot, andi know that no matter how many rolls i shoot, there will be more for me to learn in the next shot.

    Good on you, with that attitude you can't go wrong. Next time though, maybe learn a bit more before deciding to lambast the group.

    IMHO, i think that a photographer should accept other's comments and criticism willingly, whether they are good or bad, whether they are correct or not. just my opinion. ppl dont hafta follow it.

    Yup, agree with you here totally.

    i was brought into photography by a manual SLR that was probably older then me, then to my first wife, EOS 88 and then my 2nd wife and current love, EOS 300.

    I started with a camera that wasn't older than me (but was older than you, just). The first camera that I properly owned was older than me and a lot of people here. And after that I've been through more cameras than most people, yourself included.

    maybe this is the reason why i find it hard to change my mentality.

    All due respect, because I'm not trying to slam you here, but that's a lousy excuse. Like I said, I started the same way you did. But I don't have a problem tempering my outlook towards the pros and cons of each, and that's after having worked with both extensively over the last two years. I recognise there are benefits and drawbacks to each. I have arguably the best (35mm based) digital camera and best film camera at my dispossal. Over the last 18 months it has been an easy decision as to which is a better photographic tool. But I have no problem with the other. And the reason why I own both is because I use them for their own separate strengths.

    some photographers who started off with digital cam will have a different type of mentality bout photography i presume.

    Well I didn't start off with a digital camera, but I still think different from you. I think you were way out of line, although with due credit, you've never got flustered or engaged in shameless name calling. And good on you for that. Another rule in life, don't presume too much.

    well, too bad i can't use big words like others, otherwise i'll be using them.

    Big words don't mean anything if you don't have the experience or substance to back them up. Forget concentrating on big words and focus on the content. It's a bit like photography really. Big words are like window dressing with cameras with lots of bells and whistles, digital even. But at the end of the day, who cares about big words? It's the photo or message that counts.

    to those who said that i probobly neva played or toyed around with photoshop, well, you dont know me, so how can you make that statement?

    Fair play, I'm not sure who did.

    ouch...been using PS 5...now using 5.5...still going on...

    Good, because it's a lovely program. I've been using it donkey's years as well. Since v.4

    but stil, i will not put away the thought of using photoshop to digitally alter my images in the future. who knows?

    Well, I got news for you. Many people are already doing this to their own images. Just an honest, serious question. If you're comfortable compositing images for your wallpaper, then why not your photographs? At the end of the day, where do you draw the line? Is there still a line in this day and age?

    also sorrie to your photoshop, whom i've said to be only for professionals and not for people who can't take a pic properly and hafta use PS to alter it.

    Photoshop is a great program, for what it can do. If it gets used by some people to save a bad pic, then that's too bad and nothing to do with the software. But take heart from this. Photoshop can never made a bad picture good. You yourself are well aware that it's the photographer, and not the camera, that creates a good picture. Well, if it's well composed, it deserves to be a good picture right? But if it's poorly composed, then whether Photoshop is needed to lift the picture or not won't matter, because it will either be a poorly composed improperly exposed shot, or an equally rubbish poorly composed, properly exposed shot. So photographers who can see a good image, perhaps such as yourself, will always have an edge.

    Photography, and I think you were trying to push this point yourself, is about what's six inches behind the viewfinder. In which case, then have confident in your own ability, and there's no need to feel threatened whatever technology somebody else is using. And don't worry about whether other photographers are churning out good stuff or not, worry about what you are taking yourself.

    What makes a photographer valuable, and hence able to command high fees, doubtless like the professional you are working with, is not their ability to get the exposure right. I can teach any 16 year old that. If that were what were important, then photographers would be nothing more than machine operators (which is alas, the perception among quite a bit of the Singapore society). No, it's the creative input that goes into creating a photograph, which Photoshop can never assist.

    sorrie to you all.

    Quit apologising. We're all here to learn.

  13. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default Re: sorrie man...

    Hi,

    Sorry, couldn't resist this....

    Originally posted by langzi
    i am not flaming digital users, but just that maybe some of you are right. i am just to stubborn to change my mentality. i was brought into photography by a manual SLR that was probably older then me, then to my first wife, EOS 88 and then my 2nd wife and current love, EOS 300.
    Ah, and I was presuming you are using the likes of a Nikon FM, FM2, Canon F1, EF, etc.

    Regards
    CK

  14. #74
    cliveming
    Guests

    Default

    Dun argue liao lal.... Although i like the traditional film SLRs, but we should follow the technology, one day we will all going to be using the Digital camera, this will come true, but maybe need a long long time.....
    so dun care about the camera using, just can get the photo you like then that's all......
    How come just a digital and analog, then can argue so long????

  15. #75

    Default

    as much as some of you guys are using strong words on the original poster, I have to say the uglier side of all these exchanges of words seems to come from the people who are "trying to teach him a lesson".

    The ironic part of this is that the responders made them selves into the model that they wanted to criticize.

    The original poster have different views, and if you want to engage in a meanful exchange of words, do so properly. On one hand you guys say that photography should be large enough for all kind of people/style/philosophy/ideas, but at the same time you're slamming the original poster for his views.

    The first post contained very individualistic views, strong but still not a troll. It seems that the other people took that as a sign of the flood gates opening and "let all hell break lose".

    Although the post stated with an observation that most of the photographers here started with digital, it didn't get personal. Until people started to get sarcastic and labeled him with ugly names and started to presume thing about him.

    Words on the screen can be read in many ways, but it is unmistakable some of the following posts are in bad taste and in my opinon more of a flame bait than the first post.



    rgs
    rueyloon
    36frames Wedding Photography - http://www.36frames.com
    rueyloon - http://www.rueyloon.com

  16. #76
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Originally posted by rueyloon

    I have to say the uglier side of all these exchanges of words seems to come from the people who are "trying to teach him a lesson".

    Right. Seeing as I've been as far as I can tell the main guy trying to help him, I have to say something don't I? How many times do you need me to reinforce that I am being sincere. Frankly, the thread is dying down now (finally), and if you can read my last post as anything other than even and helpful, then I really don't know what to say.

    If anything, your post does absolutely no constructive good in a thread which has settled down.

    Now, unless somebody has something constructive to add, I would recommend we stop claiming the original post was a troll or that replies were flames. There is little point in calling party X or Y into question. The actual content of the thread has been well debated in fairly good spirits, and posting stuff about people slamming other people will start the real ugly stuff.

  17. #77
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default

    Originally posted by Jed
    The actual content of the thread has been well debated in fairly good spirits, and posting stuff about people slamming other people will start the real ugly stuff. [/B]
    ....which will be a REALLY BAD THING (TM)
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  18. #78

    Default

    Hi,
    this is an interesting tread...haha...
    firstly, where does the 90% figure comes about? Leonard did a statistic check? No doubt i do agree with Leonard on some of his view points on making people lazy, but many see it as a great way to learn. My guess is many of the DC users are beginners or students set out to learn photography.. (people like me.. heee)

    I think most of them knows the pros and cons of DC Vs SLR. or other format. Years back, we dont have the luxury of technology to help us learn... thats what kills my interests when i was 13 years old... purchasing a beginner SLR is alright, but developing the film and finding out only 1 or 2 pictures turn out alright proof too expensive for me as a student. not forgetting having to record down the setting of each photo... dont you guys agree its a long long long learning curve???

    From what i see, Many of the DC user do move on to SLR, or perhaps other format. Or some pros here still uses Digital SLR, there really isnt any direction of which way it is going... just a matter of preferences.

    I guess photography is kind of subjective, and many has difference level of interest and purposes for individual... why go around condeming people that uses other format? some think medium format has the best results, should they go around telling people 35mm sucks? i hope not. Perhaps pin hole camera user had say the same things to 35mm user too?? why not just let digital takes off and see how far it goes rather then putting it down... anyway... isnt more choices better then no choices? i would rather have a choice of carrying a 35mm SLR or DC to remote mountain rather then pin hole camera.

    In my opinion, DC didnt kill photography, instead it rekindle interest in many, increase interest and perhaps boast morale...in hope of someday they will be able to make a choice of which format that suits them best.

    Those who knows me may remember i have utmost respect for those who can do really well in film photography. Its hard work comparing to digital imaging, so be a kind soul and give advice to beginners rather then putting them down with curel words... after all, its fun and interest that most of us seek for... why be bother so much about which format each individual use?

    this is my opinion only...

    cheers

  19. #79
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by mooks85
    In my opinion, DC didnt kill photography, instead it rekindle interest in many, increase interest and perhaps boast morale...in hope of someday they will be able to make a choice of which format that suits them best.
    This is so true. I started photography about 14 years ago, while I was still in my secondary school's Art Elective Program and photography club. Was doing B&W then, and had to do all the darkoom stuff. That was fun. Especially when all those film, paper and chemicals are free.

    By the time I got into the polytechnic, NS and work, I eventually shot less and only when I travel. Cost was one of the issues. And at that time, I didn't know of any good labs, and the neighbourhood ones are so crappy.

    The first digital camera I actually touched is my company's Kodak DCS460. That was like 6 years ago. It has a Nikon F90 body, 1.3x multiplier, 6 megapixels and takes Nikon F-mount lenses. Very high quality pictures, all at a price I can't afford. (~$40K then)

    Then came the consumer digital cameras. My department acquired a 1.5 megapixel Fuji. (the 460 belongs to another department). Quality isn't very good.

    Then a friend bought an Olympus C2000Z. Now we're talking. Now we have a good 2 megapixel digicam with reasonably good quality, images which can be printed up to 8x10.

    I soon bought a Coolpix 950 in 1999. That really rekindled my interest. I shot a lot, and tried out things I never tried on my SLR. Bought almost all the associated accessories too. And it gives me very good images. And unlike P&S cameras, I have quite a bit of control over it.

    I soon outgrew it. The next logical thing was to buy a digital SLR. But at today's prices, it's quite unaffordable. And me being a Nikon freak doesn't really help things either - I wanted one with a Nikon body, one that can take Nikon lenses. The S1 Pro almost fit the bill, but the body sucks. So I bought a F100 and let the lab scan my film for me.

    Digital photography can rekindle a lost interest, or spark a new interest in beginners. Whether it's on a piece of celluloid coated with silver halides or as 1s and 0s on a piece of memory card, it's still photography.

    Regards
    CK

  20. #80
    langzi
    Guests

    Default no doubt

    no doubt that DC has bought photography back to some ppl....
    i take back my words bout digital killed photography now, cos i know that in the near future, digital cam wil probably take a hugh chunk of the market and if we dont follow, perhaps there will be good and bad points.

    good points as in that we will be able to achieve results almost immediately, and thus efficeincy. my guess that in the future, efficiency is more impt.

    bad points as in that ppl MAY, i state may, for totally new photographers adopt the bad mentality that 'no good, trash and take again' thus the old birds must teach and cultivate the correct way of using digital. old birds, we're countin on you...

    let's take pictures ppl...some may do it for themselves, some may do it for the public...but we are still taking pics.

    cheers,
    leonard

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •