Re: A camera question for alt-photo.

On Sat, 1 Jul 2006, Dan Burkholder wrote:
> I haven't touched my single remaining view camera in years so I won't go
> into that but I did recently jump from Nikon to Canon after more than
> three decades of faithful (and enjoyable) Nikon use.

I agree with Dan as far as I can understand his tech-speak .... I think
what hasn't perhaps been adequately addressed is that your photography
will/can change when you go to digital. At least I found it extremely
liberating (for all that I HATE HATE HATE this Canon, Tom, but I don't
know what digital camera I could get I'd like better... about which more
in a minute.)

My point is that using film, whether it's 36 frames or 20 sheets packed,
or 16 frames, or whatever, is EXTREMELY inhibiting.. only in part because
you don't see it when you take it, don't know if you've got it til the lab
(or your darkroom) upchucks it... I can shoot digital like a drunken
sailor and sit down when the memory card & the spare are full, and let's
say I'm not near my computer or one of those card download gizmos, I can
still in a pinch edit and free up another dozen or 3 frames. And nothing
wasted... no film to throw out, no chemicals to mix & discard, just
"naah!"

My feeling is (nothing personal you understand) that ESPECIALLY large
format photographers set up everything, the light, the background, the
grey card, even what ZONE the freaking tree trunk is going to be on. So
they can make perfectly familiar "correct" photographs of which there are
already 79 million times 298 million similar or equivalent in existence.
It's safe of course, and there's surely a market. But *art* means
risk...(IMO) and all you risk with traditional large format is back pain.

As for digital cameras -- if those jerks had just called me first I could
have made some improvements, like for instance a positive lock so that the
x*^_+!@5$(*&%$#@ thing doesn't change settings every time you pick it up
(I think I've mentioned that I fasten all my settings down with color
coded tape, which is a help tho not foolproof).

As for my particular model -- Tom, not to worry, it's probably as good if
not better for me than any camera at the time. The pictures are excellent,
it's just that the software and instructions are instruments of the devil
who has got me in her sights this year overall. (Someone sent me an
IMPORTANT attachment photo that I CANNOT get out of netscape for instance,
and CANNOT CANNOT CANNOT access my replacement website since I lost my
mormal domain in major crash, & now tech support is away til Wednesay, I
think just to avoid ME ! Etc.)

But a propos of digital cameras -- most of you probably know this, but I
was astonished when my daughter came home with an 8 pixel (canon) that did
everything mine does except "raw" (which I haven't used yet & doubt I ever
will) for $299... about half the weight of mine and several other
improvements. She bought it by comparing Pogue in the Times & Consumer
Reports and looking at the 3 cameras they both starred. But she was
thorougly bummed when she knew more about the features (which she only
learned from those articles) than the sales help at Adorama. She finally
chose the model (which one I forget) when a fellow customer taking a
course at ICP said this is the one most of us use & the instructor
suggests, too.

I loved that ! In fact I've also gotten excellent advice from fellow
customers... was saved an expensive mistake with disk printer at Staples
by one, who was very kind & a fountain of expertise... etc.

However, *all* her sources recommended the AA batteries rather than
rechargeable... so that's what she got. ...for various reasons. I like my
rechargeables (I have a spare), but she's in Italy now & the point, or
part of it, is that you can pick up AA batteries anywhere.

Then again, she's smarter than I am. She was able to figure out how to
turn off the red light that drains your batteries & drives your subjects
to making angry faces by checking the manual....Tho she pointed out,
nowhere did the instructions tell you WHERE to find that info. She just
turned to the manual in desperation when the regular controls wouldn't.

Do they EVER try these cameras out on someone who doesn't know everything
already?

Oh never mind....

But PS:The claim that you spend as much on paper and ink as you would on
film etc doesn't IME apply. No matter what your actual exhibition + work
prints cost, the point I'm making is that you can experiment, stumble,
fail & find eureka freely, for free... Who prints everything they shoot,
anyway -- there's not time enough left in the world... or try them small
first, or whatever. Not every photo thought has to be a salon print. They
can be work thoughts. ommercial Epson paper is like 10 cents a sheet @
fine for the purpose.

cheers,

Judy
Received on 07/01/06-04:34:34 PM Z