Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 32 of 32

Thread: SLR with Pro Film scanner and DSLR

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Originally posted by Knighthunter
    Bit contradiction here with your statement, I had real experience to go to Photographer booth at Australia WRC series for two consecutives years. My friend from Mitshubishi Ralliart gave me pass to access the pit and press room. I saw lots of photographer compiling their shots taken from dirt tracks, I can't believe how may prints they have that time and at the end they only chose 3-4 prints to be sent to their editor. I do believe they are competence photographer since most of them are team official photographer and they came from different parts of the world. I wonder how to gage this type of photographer with your standard.
    Well, speaking as someone hopefully of their standard, I think I should have a few things to add. I for one can easily testify that more is not always better. Choosing only 3-4 prints to send off is because (and don't laugh, these are deadly serious and important reasons):

    [1] The editor only wants 3-4 pictures.
    [2] These photographers know how to edit their best 3-4 pictures.

    As I've been trying to demonstrate via the portfolio forum, editing is not something many photographers get to grips with in a hurry. When you are working on a deadline and your editor only wants 3-4 pictures, you only send 3-4 pictures, not 34. That is, if you want to keep your job.

    Put it another way. If you know the magazine is only going to use 2 pictures, there is absolutely no point sending in 10 or even 6. If you feel that you might not pick the right ones to send, then that's because you don't know how to edit your stuff. Professionals can edit out the ruff and send in the best 3-4. If those don't fit the bill, then the other 34 aren't going to and there's no point sending them. If there were something completely unique that the editor is after, then he or she would have told the snapper before hand, if not, would put in a request after the fact, and the photographer would go and look through his mountains of frames.

    I shoot as much as I can, but I don't make sure I send in one picture of Beckham, one picture of Keane, one picture of Giggs, one picture of whoever, just on the off chance a news editor might be focusing on that player. I shoot, send in my normal lot, and if they do need a picture of Giggs for example, they'll ring my desk who will ring me, I will sift through my lot, find a picture of Giggs, and send it along. Sure it take additional time, but you don't want your editor to do the editing for you (ironic I know, but...)

    We shoot lots for all kinds of reasons, stock being a major reason. Which means while a small number of our shots might be shot for immediate news use, a good number is actually shot, catalogued at a later date, and shunted to a stock library. And eventually makes the agency more than live pictures. So they shoot more for a reason.

    Also, sport is probably the one area (not exclusively, there are others) where you cannot shoot one frame and get the shot. Yes you've seen these guys work. Have you seen film snappers shoot sport? They shoot every bit as many as digital shooters. You pile up a small mountain of film canisters by half time. In fact, I probably shoot less with digital than with film, simply because my film camera happens to churn through frames a lot faster.

    When you are working professionally, cost of film is really a moot point in general, which really does take professionals out of the equation in addressing the original topic.

    Regarding shutter life, as we know both DSLR and SLR has same shutter life.

    Not necessarily. It depends on how the shutter of the specific DSLR is designed, but because of greater flexibility in design of DSLR shutters, they have the potential to be constructed to take less strain than conventional SLRs and thereby last longer on average.

    The same reason has the nifty side benefit that a D1 series camera can be made to sync with flash at around 1/2000 or even faster with conventional flash units. The only reason 1/500 is stated as the maximum is because otherwise the flash duration can become longer than the shutter speed...

    SLR+Drum Scanner - is a perfect combination for people who thinks that DSLR depreciation is unjustifiable. Extra $1000 saving can supply film and developing/printing cost for more than one year for average shooter.

    As you've already mentioned, yes a drum scanner costs a lot more than DSLRs.

  2. #22
    Member Knighthunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Pigeon Hole in Mandalay
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Hi Jed,
    I am concur with you......
    One thing that I am enjoy the most from DSLR is the freedom of clicking the shutter without have to blow hole in my wallet.

    Last addition:
    All of us want to shoot like PRO, therefore it is relevant if I bring professional phtograher into account.
    I believe lots of people will see red if someone telling them amateurish...sadly it's true.
    Last edited by Knighthunter; 26th November 2002 at 01:38 PM.
    W204FL

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default

    Hi

    unashamedly my personal style is to shoot a lot, then whittle the final selection down to the best. My preference is to work the situation until all possible angles are exhausted or until the decisive moment has been reached, whichever is sooner.

    having said that, however, some of my best shots are one off attempts with no chance of a second frame ever. But that's also because prior to that I've already "warmed" myself up with a few frames, my camera is ready, i'm mentally alert, my exposure is set (or remembered in my head), and my focus is near the final distance.

    that applies whether it's digital or film, auto or manual SLR.

    Film is cheap, but the moment is not. If using digital, then all the more so there's no excuse not to get that desired picture / moment.

    I also believe that to learn photography, the more you shoot, the more you will improve. (Of course learn as you shoot and not fire and forget the lessons you learnt!)

    Simply reading Clubsnap for tips and tricks and not willing to burn film to try out the techniques does nothing to improve anything.
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Originally posted by Knighthunter
    Hi Jed,
    I am concur with you......
    One thing that I am enjoy the most from DSLR is the freedom of clicking the shutter without have to blow hole in my wallet.

    Last addition:
    All of us want to shoot like PRO, therefore it is relevant if I bring professional phtograher into account.
    I believe lots of people will see red if someone telling them amateurish...sadly it's true.

    SLR----You click the shutter then blow a hole in the pocket
    DSLR--You blow a huge hole in the pocket, then you click the shutter madly to justify it.

    LPPL isn't it?

  5. #25

    Default

    At 3 frames per second continuous shooting on the D30, it's amazing how different the shots are from each other. This gives you the luxury (afterwards) of looking through and picking the best one.

    What I REALLY need is 8fps...

  6. #26

    Lightbulb

    SLR----You click the shutter then blow a hole in the pocket
    DSLR--You blow a huge hole in the pocket, then you click the shutter madly to justify it.

    Whether SLR or DSLR both resulted in blowing huge hole in the pocket. However, the skill you have learn, it can't value by $$$$.

    Knowing where, when and how to take a good picture, it show how value of your life is to enjoy any moment that are unforgetable when you picture show the result to people.

    I would say, it is really good in joining clubsnap as a members.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    5,011

    Default

    Please remember that the original comparison is between DSLR vs SLR + film scanner. For that case, I feel that one important factor not mentioned is time.

    With DSLR, I can shoot, go home, and start working on the images with PS immediately.

    With SLR+film scanner, I have to shoot, send in the film for processing, and then spend the time scanning the images, before I can really work with the images in PS.

    Is that time one have to spend worth the cost differnece between a DSLR and an SLR+film scanner combination? That depends on the photographer.

    I own a film scanner myself, and it does take a lot more time with the SLR+scanner route to get images ready for digital processing. Especially when my scanner does not have the DigitalICE built in.

    - Roy
    As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Yes time is also a key factor and a valuable commodity. Certainly as a working professional you want to cut down the time spent post processing so that you can spend more time marketing and shooting.

  9. #29
    ziyter
    Guests

    Default

    Originally posted by Knighthunter

    This how I justify my DSLR depreciation:
    Shooting with 35mm film:
    Film cost: $6 (averaging) 36exp
    Processing and Printing: 40c/print
    Total cost per roll: $20.40
    In one year if my DSLR depreciated by 1k at least I must shoot 1765 exposure to justify the cost. But now less than one month I already got more than 1k shoots........
    See the difference?
    Just my rough calculation
    Actually in the accountability sense for a business man or maybe a photgraphy pro, this depreciation calculation method is reasonable in that the pro would want to match the revenue earned with the capital expenditure of the asset realised( depreciation) to conclude at a difference which is the profit or loss.

    However for a amatuer, the accounting prudence method of matching expense with revenue may not be totally relevant here.

    In a comparison,the relevant cost method should be used in that whatever cost already incurred before the evaluation stage should be irrelevant.
    If u got no cam, wana decide between film or digi, then cost of digi will be matched against cost of film cam with film developing cost included.
    If got a film oredi wana decide to buy a DSLR, then relevant cost will be the cost of DSLR and film cost,etc. Think a heavy shooters will certainly benefit from a DSLR in long term

    All this method of calculation take only quantitative benefits and did not take into consideration of qualitative benefits.

    Well ..... not trying to promote any accounting method or theory, just maybe highlight some ways of measuring our needs. Hope it will be useful for people here.

    Also no intention to criticise KnightHunter's personal calculations :P

    Just my 1 cents view.

  10. #30
    Member Knighthunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Pigeon Hole in Mandalay
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Originally posted by ziyter



    Also no intention to criticise KnightHunter's personal calculations :P

    Just my 1 cents view.
    It's okay...it's just rough calculation comparision between running cost, I never compared the capital cost
    I believe you are accountant.........
    W204FL

  11. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    not sure, but are u working with the cam? if not why not use the money for something else?
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  12. #32
    ziyter
    Guests

    Default

    Originally posted by Knighthunter


    It's okay...it's just rough calculation comparision between running cost, I never compared the capital cost
    I believe you are accountant.........
    Hahaha .... well .... you are half rite , I study accountancy but no where near an accountant post. I am in the civil service instead and nowhere near the job of accountant :P

    Regards

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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
  •