From: Campos & Davis Photos (photos@campos-davis.co.uk)
Date: 04/11/00-06:30:52 AM Z
This is a very big worry.
Digital capture is still expensive if you want good quality and
storage will be a problem if future as different systems are developed
which replace each other. CD's, tape etc etc, then tape drives go out
of fashion.
The other worry is that equipment is not supported by manufacturers
for as long as conventional equipment. My Nikon FM is still supported
after 15 years use by Nikon UK professional services, but a film
scanner which is four years old and cost a fortune then is not
supported. I wouldn't mind this if the new scanners were super
machines which did a lot more and a four year old scanner was now
rubbish, but the ONLY difference is that the new ones are faster, same
colour bit depth, same samples per inch etc etc just faster. I don't
need faster just reliable with support for a professional bit of
equipment for the true life of the machine!
Campos & Davis Photos
6 Cranbourne Road
London N10 2BT - UK
Tel: + 44 181 883 8638
Fax: +44 208883 8638
email: photos@campos-davis.co.uk
www.campos-davis.co.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Dan Smith, Photographer <shooter@brigham.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: 10 April 2000 05:21
Subject: Re: life of images
> Have you ever shot for National Geographic? A few thousand images &
the
> magazine picks what goes with the story line. No misuse of
technology, just
> the way they do business.
>
> Shoot NFL games and you go through a lot of film and see 1-3 images
used.
>
> This is not 'shoot 200 & hope for the best' by any means. Often with
sports
> & photoessays there are many excellent images from which the final
product
> is chosen.
>
> The original post was concerning the shooting of an event or story
for full
> coverage, the editors put one image in the paper or magazine, and
since it
> is digitally done, all but the archived one with the publication get
erased.
> Not at all like having contact sheets to pore over later as has been
the
> norm.
>
> Dan Smith
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Art Kerbs" <akerbs@andresimaging.com>
> To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
> Cc: "RICK CAPPELLETTI (E-mail)" <RCAPPELLETTI@andresimaging.com>;
"GARY
> HAWKEY (E-mail)" <ghawkey@home.com>; "ED VANBAERLE (E-mail)"
> <evanbaerle@aol.com>; "TOM RIEGER (E-mail)" <tom@rieger.com>
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2000 3:30 PM
> Subject: RE: life of images
>
>
> > Can you believe the below!! photographic technology, shoot 200
hundred
> images and hope for the best. That's a misuse technology
> > and on way could you call that person a photographer!!!
> > Art Kerbs
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Les Newcomer [SMTP:lnphoto@ismi.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2000 3:21 PM
> > To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
> > Subject: Re: life of images
> >
> >
> >
> > > Shoot 200 images for a story and 3 are used. ALL THE REST
> > > ARE ERASED! No record other than what the paper printed. No
contact
> sheets
> > > for future editors to look over and use other images from. No
record of
> what
> > > really happened, just the 'grabber' shot taken at the time.
> > >
> > > dan smith
> >
> > sort of like what we have during the heyday of the Speed Graphic
when you
> only
> > have time for the one best shot, plus a spare.
> > les
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 06/13/00-03:09:47 PM Z CST