Digital for weddings.......

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by nonamegiven, Aug 20, 2003.

  1. nonamegiven

    George Kerby Guest

    You gotta admit that you can see the differences between 35 mm and MF when
    8" x 10's are placed together. Most order 8" x 10"s for their albums, at
    least they used to...


    ______________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - FAST UNLIMITED DOWNLOAD - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
     
    George Kerby, Aug 21, 2003
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. nonamegiven

    George Kerby Guest

    I don't know to whom you are addressing since you didn't use any quotes of
    the poster to direct your answer. You are using hyperbole to make a point -
    to the point that it is ridiculous. I am sure that formal wedding
    photographers used Press cameras before MF became popular with Rolli in the
    50s, much as 'photojournalist did before 35mm became the tool of choice.
    However, because one may want to place a formal wedding photograph on
    display at 11x 16x or larger, MF runs away from 35 mm like a hare from a
    turtle. Imperfections, dust and all sorts problems are more noticeble when
    you start with a smaller media. AND even though 4" x 5" is four time the
    size of MF, it is just not practical these days. I don't even know if Kodak
    or anyone makes color filmpacks these days. I guess you could backpack a
    hundred or so Lisco filmholders to cover the event, if you really wanted to.
    Bigger is better. But practical is best.

    I shoot whatever is necessary to get the job done. I stopped shooting 8" x
    10" because the cost of the materials far outweigh any cost savings to the
    Client via the (almost unheard of these days) gang separations. With Pro
    Digital, such extreme LF cameras today are mainly for the hobbyists who can
    afford the media and pros whose Clients demand that they do so.

    Concerning your last statement, I think anyone outside of the cross-eyed can
    see the difference. For every job there are the correct tools. The job of
    the shooter is to determine what makes the most sense for each set of given
    conditions.


    ______________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - FAST UNLIMITED DOWNLOAD - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
     
    George Kerby, Aug 21, 2003
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. nonamegiven

    Paul Heslop Guest

    It's an oly 220zoom (could be a different number in the states)
    everything is virtually auto.
    There is a =/- for lightening or darkening images but the manual isn't
    too great... is that what you mean?
     
    Paul Heslop, Aug 22, 2003
    #23
  4. nonamegiven

    Mark B. Guest

    Maybe. I use the Oly 2020 zoom in work, it uses a pair of directional
    arrows to allow under- or over-exposure settings. On the LCD, it shows up
    in 1/3 increments, i.e. +0.3, +0.7, -0.3, etc. For a white gown, you need
    to over-expose by at least 2/3 to 1 stop.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Aug 23, 2003
    #24
  5. nonamegiven

    Paul Heslop Guest

    Thanks Mark, I'll take a look at that setting and see how it goes.
     
    Paul Heslop, Aug 23, 2003
    #25
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.