- Subject: Re: [iris-talk] cameras..
- From: "Patrick Orr" <PatrickJOrr@hotmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:37:44 -0700
Although I usually have at least a thousand words to say on any topic, I think Laurie summed up this topic pretty darn good. All I can say to add to her comments is, "Ditto". This is exactly how I feel on the topic.
I have been very pleased with my Kodak DC215 as an inexpensive, yet user friendly digital camera, in which I can photograph my irises and other things to put on the computer. Although its resolution is not as nice as Laurie's, it does the trick.
The instant gratification I receive by viewing the photo immediately and being able to download it to my computer within a minute of taking the photo far exceeds any reason that has been handed me by others with regards to purchasing an expensive film camera.
I too don't want to get into photography that much...I just wanna have FUN!
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 10:53 AM
Subject: Re: [iris-talk] cameras..
>I understand the benefits of digital, however , unless you pay a lot more
>camera, that sells in the 5 to 8 or even 10 thousand range you will not
>photos then with standard film. You should use good film, and then have it
>at the lab, then go over it in photo shop.. You should stick to the film
>of taking the easy way out. Learn about photography first, and get a
>Camera with good glass.. I prefer Cannon my self. I also like Hasselblad.
>I and my wife are professional photographers,.. among other things
>our web site.. http://www.reflectionstudio.com
Since your post was offered in direct response to my own, I am inclined
to provide my reaction to your suggestions. I am not a professional
photographer, nor do I currently aspire to become one. I understand the
merit in learning photography, but my priorities lie merely in taking
acceptable (to me) pics in an enjoyable and easy manner with a camera or
cameras that provide as close to point-and-shoot technology as I can get.
I have and use a Canon EOS Rebel XS print camera (primarily in full auto
mode), and it's generally a bit easier to use than my Kodak DC280 digital
camera. Since I have not yet taken the time to learn about photography
(and don't anticipate doing so anytime soon), I much prefer to take the
easy way out to satisfy my desire to create a permanent record of my iris
blooms, be it by digital or print technology. Because of my amateurish
skills, I find it much easier to produce good quality images with the
digital camera through which I can delete unacceptable pics as quickly as
I take them. And as I take more and more pics with the digital, I learn
more and more about how different angles and lighting conditions affect
photographic images. This is practical knowledge I will no doubt be able
to apply in time with some consistency to my film camera as well. In the
meantime, I'd rather make cheap mistakes with the digital than expensive
ones on film.
I very much respect your opinion as a professional photographer, but my
goals are not the same as yours.
zone 3b northern MN - clay soil
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/