Re: Digital camera blues

For anyone on a PC, I'd recommend iMatch for cataloguing and finding
files, but there isn't a Mac version. Perhaps Fotostation?

Fast PCs with a lot of memory are also not that expensive. Currently I
have 1.75Gb and it does speed up Photoshop very significantly. Dual
processor systems are not that expensive, though I don't yet have once,
probably next time. Using a Raid 1 pair of disks, saves time on some file
handling operations (though not all) as well as providing some vital
redundancy. It was good being able to simply slot in a new hard drive when
one went, and have no data loss.

Film storage is a problem for me, especially with contact sheets as well,
and it gets even worse if you have enprints. Storing slides is also a
pain, and in some ways digital makes life easier in this respect. Actually
finding things is probably easier with digital, as it is rather easier to
catalogue the files. I'm currently only up to 1997 on putting a limited
catalogue of my negatives onto the computer.

Peter Marshall
Photography Guide at About http://photography.about.com/
email: photography.guide@about.com
_________________________________________________________________
London's Industrial Heritage: http://petermarshallphotos.co.uk/
The Buildings of London etc: http://londonphotographs.co.uk/
My London Diary http://mylondondiary.co.uk/
and elsewhere......

> Scanning an excellent film original has certain advantages for the
> highest
> fidelity work.
> Someone wrote a blurb once about "what if digital was invented first",
> it
> examined
> what the perception of film would be if film was born in this age. I
> wonder if
> someone
> would post that again.
>
> It would be interesting to read a rough estimate of how much storage it
> would
> take digitally to equal what a couple of storage binders with say fifty
> or one
> hundred
> print-file sleeves of color film; given an output size of an 11x14
> print. Next,
> estimate
> what a cabinet of full binders would be. Digital storage is
> problematic. But
> what is
> equally problematic is being able to access those images quickly,
> hence, the
> rise
> in MAM and DAM solutions. It would be interesting to know what
> solutions
> for accessing the alternative digital image is for everyone. I'm
> currently using
> Canto
> Cumulus and Filemaker Pro and I'd like to explore others. Any
> suggestions?
>
> Regarding the large image file manipulation, I have a few suggestions.
>
> A faster machine: a G5 Macintosh 2GHz
> faster RAM and more of it: 2GB minimum ( the G5 can expand to 8GB)
> A second internal hard drive that spins at 7200rpm or faster (this is
> for your
> scratch disk)
> Adobe Photoshop CS (this program is tweaked for the G5)
>
> I know.... it's an expensive solution.
> The alternative: patience
>
> best regards,
>
> Phillip
>
>
>
>
> Charlotte 1 wrote:
>
> > Another thing to consider is how much data your computer will be able
> > to
> > handle. I have a 1 Ghz Imac with two 512 MB memory (cards?) - it was
> > the
> > fastest Imac I could purchase back in February (2003) but it has
> > trouble
> > dealing with large images.. Some of my images are 240 MB and I have
> > to sit
> > and wait 20-30 seconds every time I want to make an adjustment (and
> > about a
> > minute to open up the image itself).
> >
>
>
Received on Sun Nov 9 09:16:59 2003