[BUGS] making photos and toor access

[jonathan michaels]

rob,

thanks specifically for this post it pointed me in i think a
sensible direction ..

i have a small collection of cameras, all 35 mm, film, i prefer
b/w its easier to work, esp with my convoluted circumstances,
colour, acuity and much brain confusion, it produced a right mess
at times.

the idea about film to cd/dvd format is i think about the best,
as i no longer am able/ probably not capable of running a small
print shop, like int eh old days with a meopta enlarger ,, it
was really nice when i was able to move up to 110 format, had a
simple mamiya tlr )twin lens reflex( besides they no longer
make kodachrome 25 asa that was a reallllly good media, got teh
pigments right really nice film to work with .. even made
realllly good b/w prints predictable too, unlike some b/w film
stock (ilford springs to mind), some times trx400 would be
groggy abut not when pushed to 1600 nice results.

are these sorts of things possible with dslr "film" i take it
tehat teh ccd element is teh equivalent of teh film stock and
using stuff like the gimp, or, photoshop is teh "processing"
and or the printing stage ?? i see no value in printing as good
colour canon lazers are still frightfully expensive ($10K's) i
havent seen a soho type of colour printer that produces good
quiltay prints that would last beyond a couple of years in teh
sun before teh bleaching would negate any/most of teh original
colour balance, composition. i'm not a ludite, just have an
idea of what i like and most of that is not reproducable on teh
"toy" stuff sold today and teh "good" is, well when the lotto
cheque clears i'll build a decent 'printshop' right after i get
my brain fixed and teh corneas repaired .. sort off <grin> 

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:13:38PM +1100, Rob Hurle wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
> 
> > i've been a keen photographer all my life, i am now looking to move to the 
> > digital world, from my old analogue pentax and mamiya slrs with range of lens, 
> > std format and some med telephotos for teh spotmatic and teh (really nice) 
> > mamiya z. if it means anything thats what i am trying to reproduce, because of 
> > my neurological disfunction i have difficulties with most of teh "small" 
> > digital cameras and my hands have learned how to function in the 35mm handheld 
> > slr realm.
> 
> I've also messed about with photography for quite a while - very happy with 
> Olympus SLRs, Pentax SLR, Mamiya C330, etc.  A while back I moved to digital for 
> some archival work.  Digital photography is changing so quickly that anything 
> that anyone says now will be out of date tomorrow.
> 
>  	I tend to think that sticking to one brand/system is best with digital 
> because, if you swap horses you may need to change lenses, cards, software, etc, 
> etc, and that can be expensive.  IMHO Nikon, Olympus, Canon should be studied. 
> Fuji Finepix has proven a problem for us.  Right now I use a Nikon Coolpix P5100 
> for "point and shoot", and it's a great camera - on "auto" the pics are quick, 
> excellent quality, battery lasts ages, etc.  For more careful and critical work 
> I use a Nikon D80 SLR, which gives a superior picture but there's much more 

nikon d200 is coming into my orbit, well my birthdays 'sugar
day' idea of affordible birthday presents.

i'm wondering if there is much real differnece (to justify) the
big difference between teh d80 and d200

> mucking about and the camera is bigger, heavier, etc.  Both seem to give best 

i like big bulky realllly big cameras, big 'toy' as i call teh
new telephones off today .. given teh neurological degrdation
becvayse of teh damage i started with and now exhasabated by
teh drugs that are supposed to 'fix' me .. am i the only one
who can see teh irony in that one ??

at any rate my bigish clumsy fingerts (can't ya'll tell from my
typing and this is on a decetn ibm model m keyboard) big works
fro me. thats why i liked teh film to cdrom option if i can
find one local (mascot'ish).

anything smaller than my (pentax) spotmatic (42 mm screw in lens
mount, matti)

> pics on "auto" for some reason.  I upgraded the "point and shoot" from an 
> Olympus mu because my eyes are cactus and I need a viewfinder - very few come 
> with a viewfinder these days.
> 
>  	That's only the start of the story.  The cameras have amazing picture 
> processing capability inside them and, if you want total control, you need to go 
> for something that just saves you the bits for later processing (and a pretty 
> smart head to know what you're going to do with the pics).  Nikon has this 
> option, but then you run into another problem.  The formats all seem to be 
> proprietary and unpublished.  So Nikon "raw" format needs Nikon software (for M$ 
> only would you believe!)  Of course, version "n" is not compatible with version 
> "n-1" but, not to worry, $$$ will fix this.  I'm not a professional photographer 

neither am i, but i like to do teh job right using decetn
equipment (not saying need expensive, name brand stuff) i knew
people who had nikon stuff and could'nt even focus .. nikon was
all that was important .. some people.

> so I just go with the flow and accept the JPEG format (lossy compression but, 
> what the hell) so that I can process using The Gimp.  Cards are another problem. 
> They are getting faster and faster with more and more bits.  The latest one I 
> bought was a SanDisk SD (Secure Digital) 4GB card, but no card reader I owned 
> could handle it.  Fortunately it came with a card<->USB reader so I didn't need 
> my card readers.  If you buy generation "n" then you can be pretty sure that 
> generation "n+1" will use an incompatible card.  Such is life.

was this teh nikon(s) or teh canon (the card reader thingie) ?
 
>  	When I started photography an old guy who taught me pointed out that the 
> photograph has to be made using light, and that all the light has to go through 
> that bit of glass in the front.  The bigger and more accurate the lens was, the 
> better the picture - that's where to spend the money.  4MB, 5MB, 10MB, 12MB or 
> whatever the camera advertises is rather negated if the lens is not up to it.

i've gto a couple of f1.4 for my 35 mm cameras not fast todays
but for a 70's spotmatic that was fast reallly fast still makes
a good showing, pity about teh depth of field at f1.4 still its
do able with a bit of a push on k'25 or trix on a gallop, grin.
 
>  	Just some random thoughts.

perhaps a few more perhaps a little less random concerning teh
d80 or one of teh d200's types, please ..

much kind regards/appreciations

jonathan

-- 
================================================================
powered by ..
QNX, OS9 and freeBSD  --  http://caamora com au/operating system
==== === appropriate solution in an inappropriate world === ====