|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
Rafe B. wrote: > At 10:03 PM 7/6/99 -0700, Michael Greer wrote: > > >Why? As in why is it necessary to take a computer? Surely a few 128 MB > Compact > >Flash cards or a high capacity device like the 340 MB IBM Microdrive will do. > >And why would a backup digital camera be necessary? Because of the relatively > >high digital camera costs, use a film camera as the back up. > > How much does one of those 128 MB cards go for, pray tell? > I'm not really up on prices and availability... but I had > the impression that 64 MB was cutting edge, and not cheap. Currently, "good" prices are roughly: 16MB - $40 32MB - $80 48MB - $100 64MB - $140 96MB - $210 128MB-$300 The prices are slightly over $2/MB. The IBM Compact Flash TypeII Microdrive is a 340MB device that lists for $499. They're only selling to OEMs right now. Slated for availability to the end user in August/September for a street of probably around $350-$400. > In any case, consider that a *single* film-scan image from > an LS-30 or SprintScan Plus is 27 Mbytes... So you're talking > LOTS of expensive memory cards, heavy compression, or both. First of all, no "affordable" digital camera can deliver a 27MB file. Secondly, there is lossy compression, and lossless compression. Obviously, JPEG is a lossy compression. But Canon and the upcoming Nikon D1 offer RAW mode file saves that are compressed, but lossless. For these files, my 4.7 MB image is saved in about 2 MB. But the truth is that I get practically irrelevant JPEG artifacting when enlarging the file to 8x10 inches at 240dpi. So I use JPEG. > The bride & groom may not care about the cost of your memory > cards, but they probably will JPG artifacts playing on the > bride's lovely smile. It doesn't happen with my camera's images. Yes, I have enlarged it past where the artifacting becomes bothersome compared to the RAW files. But I've got my own rules of thumb that I follow and it works. > >> 2) process and proof of 220 film is a lot cheaper (and faster) than > >> making digital prints > > > >But why make proof prints at all? With a digital shoot, you can do away > with the > >paper proofs. [Throw] 'em on the web and let the B&G few them there and > select > >what they want. > > Mmmm. At 56 Kbits/second? How many pictures? How many > Kbytes per picture? It's a creative approach, I have to > admit. You'd probably want some password-protection in > there, while you're at it. B&G may not want to share their > day with the world at large. While I thought this was an original idea a few months ago, I have since discovered that many wedding pros have already been doing this for a little while. So this is not theory. In fact, there are web services catering to event photographers that will handle the film processing (if you use film), posting to their web server, take the orders, and fill the reprints. They take a percentage of the sales and forward the rest of the cash to the photographer. > Mike, I'm almost surprised to hear you evangelizing for > the Digital Cause. The only thing I'm married to is what works for me. Yes, I do love technology. But if it doesn't work for me, then I won't use it. I am putting digital cameras to work for me right now because they work in my application(s). I waited 18 months before taking the plunge because they didn't work for me then. > I dunno. Hi-tech is a mixed bag, > IMHO, and that's fine by me. I can "climb the learning > curve" without buying today's hottest digicam. But when a "hot" digicam meets YOUR needs/requirements, you'll get it. At that time it still may be too early for somebody else with different requirements. Rafe, if you want to see a5x7 glossy and 8x10 matte sourced by my Canon and printed on a Sienna digital photographic printer, send me your address. BUT I NEED THEM BACK! -- Mike Greer Come visit my web site on digital photography and other interesting topics at http://greer.simplenet.com . I have been extremely lazy, so many of the topics are not finished yet. But they will be, some day. - Please: Stay on topic. Trim quoted messages. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users