Re: DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Wilba, Dec 2, 2007.

  1. Wilba

    Wilba Guest

    Wilba wrote:
    > Mr. Strat wrote:
    >>
    >> There's no substitute for time and experience.

    >
    > So now we get back to the point. I agree but I also think there IS a
    > viable substitute - histogram, highlight, and shadow displays (either on
    > the image or live). That's very valuable information, available
    > "instantly", to help you determine camera settings with accuracy.
    >
    > I also believe that if you don't already have the time and experience, at
    > least these exposure displays will help you to learn the judgement skills
    > more easily and rapidly than waiting for prints or slides to come back
    > from the lab.


    Now I understand better from another of your posts that you are talking
    about your own ability, style, and requirements, rather than making any
    global claims that histograms, etc. are useless or superfluous for everyone.
    You have tried them as intended for sufficiently long to judge that they
    don't help you, right? :)
    Wilba, Dec 2, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Wilba" <> wrote in message
    news:fit1j0$oit$...
    > Wilba wrote:
    >> Mr. Strat wrote:
    >>>
    >>> There's no substitute for time and experience.

    >>
    >> So now we get back to the point. I agree but I also think there IS a
    >> viable substitute - histogram, highlight, and shadow displays (either on
    >> the image or live). That's very valuable information, available
    >> "instantly", to help you determine camera settings with accuracy.
    >>
    >> I also believe that if you don't already have the time and experience, at
    >> least these exposure displays will help you to learn the judgement skills
    >> more easily and rapidly than waiting for prints or slides to come back
    >> from the lab.

    >
    > Now I understand better from another of your posts that you are talking
    > about your own ability, style, and requirements, rather than making any
    > global claims that histograms, etc. are useless or superfluous for
    > everyone. You have tried them as intended for sufficiently long to judge
    > that they don't help you, right? :)


    Yeah, right. ;-)

    Neil
    Neil Harrington, Dec 2, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Wilba

    Mr. Strat Guest

    In article <fit1j0$oit$>, Wilba
    <> wrote:

    > Now I understand better from another of your posts that you are talking
    > about your own ability, style, and requirements, rather than making any
    > global claims that histograms, etc. are useless or superfluous for everyone.
    > You have tried them as intended for sufficiently long to judge that they
    > don't help you, right? :)


    I've looked at them and not found them to be particularly useful. We
    didn't have them in film days and I rarely had to have custom prints
    made. As I said before, digital is just another kind of film with its
    own quirks, requirements, etc.
    Mr. Strat, Dec 2, 2007
    #3
  4. Wilba

    Wilba Guest

    Mr. Strat wrote:
    > Wilba wrote:
    >>
    >> Now I understand better from another of your posts that you are
    >> talking about your own ability, style, and requirements, rather than
    >> making any global claims that histograms, etc. are useless or
    >> superfluous for everyone. You have tried them as intended for
    >> sufficiently long to judge that they don't help you, right? :)

    >
    > I've looked at them and not found them to be particularly useful.


    OK. You said "looked at" rather than something like used, studied, worked
    with, or employed, which suggest to me that you haven't understood what they
    can do for you.

    > We didn't have them in film days and I rarely had to have custom
    > prints made. As I said before, digital is just another kind of film
    > with its own quirks, requirements, etc.


    The main one being that a sensor responds very differently to highlights. I
    can't trust my judgement to get that right like I could with reversal or
    slide film. Goodonya if you can, but I remain sceptical. :)
    Wilba, Dec 2, 2007
    #4
  5. "Mr. Strat" <> wrote in message
    news:011220072050354493%...
    > In article <fit1j0$oit$>, Wilba
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Now I understand better from another of your posts that you are talking
    >> about your own ability, style, and requirements, rather than making any
    >> global claims that histograms, etc. are useless or superfluous for
    >> everyone.
    >> You have tried them as intended for sufficiently long to judge that they
    >> don't help you, right? :)

    >
    > I've looked at them and not found them to be particularly useful. We
    > didn't have them in film days and I rarely had to have custom prints
    > made.


    So you didn't do your own printing?

    Photo labs make the necessary corrections when they make the prints. They
    always did. I never "had to have custom prints made" when I was a teen-ager
    with a Baby Brownie, either. That camera cost about a dollar, and had one
    aperture and one shutter speed so I'm inclined to doubt its exposure was
    always perfect.

    Neil
    Neil Harrington, Dec 2, 2007
    #5
  6. Wilba

    Mr. Strat Guest

    In article <fitl83$dqb$>, Wilba
    <> wrote:

    > OK. You said "looked at" rather than something like used, studied, worked
    > with, or employed, which suggest to me that you haven't understood what they
    > can do for you.


    Let's nitpick words now.

    > The main one being that a sensor responds very differently to highlights. I
    > can't trust my judgement to get that right like I could with reversal or
    > slide film. Goodonya if you can, but I remain sceptical. :)


    It's been my experience that amateurs can rarely grasp the depth of
    understanding that professionals do.
    Mr. Strat, Dec 2, 2007
    #6
  7. Wilba

    Mr. Strat Guest

    In article <>, Neil
    Harrington <> wrote:

    > So you didn't do your own printing?


    Actually, I did. I still have the equipment to do up to 16x20 in either
    B&W or color. Wanna buy some of that old stuff?
    Mr. Strat, Dec 2, 2007
    #7
  8. Wilba

    Scott W Guest

    On Dec 2, 12:38 pm, "Mr. Strat" <> wrote:
    > In article <fitl83$>, Wilba
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > > OK. You said "looked at" rather than something like used, studied, worked
    > > with, or employed, which suggest to me that you haven't understood what they
    > > can do for you.

    >
    > Let's nitpick words now.
    >
    > > The main one being that a sensor responds very differently to highlights. I
    > > can't trust my judgement to get that right like I could with reversal or
    > > slide film. Goodonya if you can, but I remain sceptical. :)

    >
    > It's been my experience that amateurs can rarely grasp the depth of
    > understanding that professionals do.


    Well, there are some really bad professionals, I need not name names.
    There is nothing about being a pro that keep one from being totally
    clueless.

    Scott
    Scott W, Dec 3, 2007
    #8
  9. "Mr. Strat" <> wrote in message
    news:021220071439246095%...
    > In article <>, Neil
    > Harrington <> wrote:
    >
    >> So you didn't do your own printing?

    >
    > Actually, I did. I still have the equipment to do up to 16x20 in either
    > B&W or color. Wanna buy some of that old stuff?


    Not me, thanks! I'd like to sell my old equipment is what I'd like to do.

    Neil
    Neil Harrington, Dec 3, 2007
    #9
  10. In rec.photo.digital.zlr Mr. Strat <> wrote:
    > In article <fitl83$dqb$>, Wilba
    > <> wrote:


    >> OK. You said "looked at" rather than something like used, studied, worked
    >> with, or employed, which suggest to me that you haven't understood what they
    >> can do for you.


    > Let's nitpick words now.


    >> The main one being that a sensor responds very differently to highlights. I
    >> can't trust my judgement to get that right like I could with reversal or
    >> slide film. Goodonya if you can, but I remain sceptical. :)


    > It's been my experience that amateurs can rarely grasp the depth of
    > understanding that professionals do.


    Anyone who has studied the work of the best professionals, read their
    writings, and listened to their interviews on radio and TV, knows that
    all they need to know is how to do it, not necessarily why what they
    do works. Some of them do indeed have a deep understanding, but most
    of them don't, simply because they don't need it. That's why there's a
    choice in the various professional qualifications a photographer can
    acquire between those that give you the skills and those that give you
    a depth of understanding.

    --
    Chris Malcolm DoD #205
    IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
    [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
    Chris Malcolm, Dec 3, 2007
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,075
    csouth
    Jun 22, 2005
  2. Neil Scott

    Replay Radio

    Neil Scott, Dec 8, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    541
  3. Jimmyzshack
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    984
    Jimmyzshack
    Aug 13, 2003
  4. Bill Tuthill

    DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

    Bill Tuthill, Nov 15, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1,142
    Views:
    14,297
    Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
    Dec 29, 2007
  5. Charles

    P&S v DSLR not a replay ...

    Charles, Nov 16, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    328
    Charles
    Nov 17, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page