Previous :: Next Topic |
Author |
Message |
MooseAndSquirrel Member
Joined: 10 Nov 2002 Posts: 2036 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dayhike Mike Bad MFKer
Joined: 02 Mar 2003 Posts: 10958 | TRs | Pics Location: Going to Tukwila |
MooseAndSquirrel wrote: | For my digestion? <burp> Maybe you meant Bushwacker's- the original poster in this thread? I have learned some stuff though, thanks all. |
Oops! Now how did I confuse you and Bushwacker? Mea culpa...
Edit: Wow. That was your first post in this thread. I really gotta lay off the (Diet) Coke... Don't know what I was thinking.
Oh well, if nothing else, I now know I can take M&S's name in vain and he'll join the discussion in a moment's notice.
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke
"Ignorance is natural. Stupidity takes commitment." -Solomon Short
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke
"Ignorance is natural. Stupidity takes commitment." -Solomon Short
|
Back to top |
|
|
chubbyhubby Member
Joined: 22 Sep 2003 Posts: 28 | TRs | Pics
|
|
chubbyhubby
Member
|
Tue Nov 04, 2003 10:08 pm
couple 'o things...
|
|
|
Shooting with les than a 1GB card can be done but this imposes several limitations.
#1) - you never take longish trips? With a film camera, you can always buy more film but with digital, you either need a digital wallet to offload your images or a large CF card. Going out for a day hike is one thing but spending two weeks on a road trip is something else entirely.
#2) - couple hundred images does _not_ mean a couple hundred prints. The higher the shooting ratio, the better chance of the best exposure, framing, etc... Digital is free once you get over the initial purchase whereas film costs for each click. There are some corrections available with RAW file formats but the RAW exposure only has about a five-stop range and you loose detail in the shadows anyway so proper exposure is still a must. See here for an explanation: The Luminous Landscape.
There is also the option of shooting two exposures several stops apart and using Photoshop to combine them into one image with a huge dynamic range - sort of what Ansel Adams did but in a digital domain.
#3) - the cards are cheap cheap cheap - stop whingeing and save up and buy it. You will not need to buy it again. Amazon from time to time will have good sales on CF cards. Costco has the SanDisk CF cards for $220/1GB. PriceGrabbers shows that this is not out of line. PriceWatch shows 1GB IBM MicroDrive cards for $180 but you need to be careful about grey market and hidden costs here. You don't need that fancy sleeping bag or special pack or boots - use the money for (running and ducking a lot of thrown objects suddenly coming in from all directions) OK OK OK... Gear lust...
#4) - JenJen's comment was "Do you really want to be fiddling with swapping a card in the middle of a snowstorm wearing mittens"
As for the life of the cards - they do have a finite life but it's negligible as far as we are concerned. Early flash memory products did have a much shorter life but the technology has gotten a lot better.
As far as formatting - sometimes cards can "loose their place" and you will get corrupted data. There are a lot of data recovery products out there for just this purpose (the directory table looses where it is in relation to the file system). An occasional format greatly minimises this. I was a delete-only person until I came --><-- this close to loosing a bunch of data. We have two digicams at work and I have had to perform data recovery on them twice before we started formatting the cards once/week.
|
Back to top |
|
|
blindie Member
Joined: 17 Apr 2003 Posts: 26 | TRs | Pics Location: Snoqualmie |
|
blindie
Member
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 1:47 am
|
|
|
I can go along with everything but:
chubbyhubby wrote: | Digital is free once you get over the initial purchase whereas film costs for each click. |
<soapbox>
You don't spend money on more film or processing. But if you think of it as free and shoot several frames of the scene you are losing time that can be spent else where. You also cheat yourself by not training your eye to capture a good exposure.
I guarantee if you think of each shot as a cost of your time and spend more time looking at what you are about to capture:
1) you will appreciate the composition you are about to capture more
2) you will come back with a higher % of well composed pictures
3) you will spend less time managing mediocre shots
</soapbox>
From my perspective Digital hasn't changed photography at all, just improved the workflow.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001 Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Tom
Admin
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:40 pm
|
|
|
Nonsense. When I'm in a situation where my eye tells me "keeper photo" I will not hesitate to let the shutter fly with abandon. Focus and metering are fallible and lighting can change in an instant. By taking fewer shots you are cheating yourself. I don't necessarily use a shotgun approach but I've hiked with people who do and my opinion is that it can only accelerate the learning process. You eventually learn what makes a good photo and what doesn't. How better to learn than by failure and experimentation? Not to mention, I think a lot of photographers think their "eye" is better than it actually is. My shotgun friend has proved it to me more than once.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dayhike Mike Bad MFKer
Joined: 02 Mar 2003 Posts: 10958 | TRs | Pics Location: Going to Tukwila |
I told Tom on one hike, "If I don't take the shot, I don't have the *option* of throwing it away when I get home."
What I like about digital photography is that you never have to worry about whether this is as good as the shot's going to get. Take the photo and move on.
Before I went digital, I used to agonize about whether climbing up the hill 20 more feet would be the better shot, or whether the views of a mountain might open up another half mile down the trail. Used to pain me to realize after the half mile of walking that the view was actually getting worse and the subject obscured because of a looming ridgeline or changing lighting / weather.
Now, I have the freedom to take them both and "let God sort them out".
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke
"Ignorance is natural. Stupidity takes commitment." -Solomon Short
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke
"Ignorance is natural. Stupidity takes commitment." -Solomon Short
|
Back to top |
|
|
catwoman Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 888 | TRs | Pics Location: somewhere near Tacoma |
|
catwoman
Member
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:12 pm
|
|
|
blindie wrote: | I can go along with everything but:
chubbyhubby wrote: | Digital is free once you get over the initial purchase whereas film costs for each click. |
<soapbox>
You don't spend money on more film or processing. But if you think of it as free and shoot several frames of the scene you are losing time that can be spent else where. You also cheat yourself by not training your eye to capture a good exposure.
I guarantee if you think of each shot as a cost of your time and spend more time looking at what you are about to capture:
1) you will appreciate the composition you are about to capture more
2) you will come back with a higher % of well composed pictures
3) you will spend less time managing mediocre shots
</soapbox>
From my perspective Digital hasn't changed photography at all, just improved the workflow. |
EXACTLY
The shotgun approach is only (sometimes) necessary (for me) for timing of a moving subject. Gosh, I rarely even use the shotgun method when shooting sports/action stuff because I've learned to get the timing right. I don't have time to be going through oodles of bad shots because I've got lots of great shots to go through.
|
Back to top |
|
|
MCaver Founder
Joined: 14 Dec 2001 Posts: 5124 | TRs | Pics
|
|
MCaver
Founder
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:15 pm
|
|
|
catwoman wrote: | Gosh, I rarely even use the shotgun method when shooting sports/action stuff because I've learned to get the timing right. I don't have time to be going through oodles of bad shots because I've got lots of great shots to go through. |
Once us shotgunners get as knowledgable as you, maybe we won't have to take so many photos. Until then, we'll just have to take as many as we can and deal with our oodles of bad shots.
|
Back to top |
|
|
catwoman Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 888 | TRs | Pics Location: somewhere near Tacoma |
|
catwoman
Member
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:21 pm
|
|
|
I guess
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001 Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Tom
Admin
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 8:07 pm
|
|
|
Hey catwoman, I like the new avatar. I have no doubts you got it perfect on the first shot.
|
Back to top |
|
|
blindie Member
Joined: 17 Apr 2003 Posts: 26 | TRs | Pics Location: Snoqualmie |
|
blindie
Member
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 8:34 pm
|
|
|
[quote="MCaver"
Once us shotgunners get as knowledgable as you, maybe we won't have to take so many photos. Until then, we'll just have to take as many as we can and deal with our oodles of bad shots. [/quote]
I have boxes of slides from days I used to shoot multiple frames (ok rolls) of the same basic image. And yes 1 or 2 really turned out. Today I take time and have myself disciplined to compose each shot. I feel it is more this discipline that produces the photographs I get back and not just experience.
Now when there is a concern of lighting I will bracket and take more shots of the SAME image. But I will spend several minutes to compose the shot first. Looking through the lens at what I'm about to capture asking myself would I put that on my wall?
So I guess I'd say the number of shots doesn't matter. The time taken to compose each of those shots is.
|
Back to top |
|
|
MCaver Founder
Joined: 14 Dec 2001 Posts: 5124 | TRs | Pics
|
|
MCaver
Founder
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:16 pm
|
|
|
I was being facetious in response to her attitude. Everyone has a system that works for them based on their experience and tools they have available. I'm perfectly comfortable with the number of photos I shoot -- and I admittedly am a shotgunner to some degree -- but it works for me. I learn something from every photo that I take, including the bad ones, and in times when the photo changes in an instant (fading light, wildlife, waterfalls) I'll shoot like a machinegun.
|
Back to top |
|
|
catwoman Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 888 | TRs | Pics Location: somewhere near Tacoma |
|
catwoman
Member
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 11:14 pm
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
catwoman Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 888 | TRs | Pics Location: somewhere near Tacoma |
|
catwoman
Member
|
Wed Nov 05, 2003 11:17 pm
|
|
|
MCaver wrote: | I was being facetious in response to her attitude. |
lol just giving back a taste of you guys' own sh*t
And yes, each person has their way of doing and using what works best for them - that's been my whole point from the beginning! MCaver gets it! Woo hoo!
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker Comfortable
Joined: 28 Jun 2002 Posts: 834 | TRs | Pics Location: Chaweng Beach, Koh Samui, Thailand |
Dayhike Mike wrote: | Oops! Now how did I confuse you and Bushwacker? Mea culpa... |
It's not that difficult to tell us apart....I'm the good lookin' one!!
BW
"Wait by the river long enough and the bodies of your enemies will float by"...Sun Tsu
"Wait by the river long enough and the bodies of your enemies will float by"...Sun Tsu
|
Back to top |
|
|
|