hi Frank, I can jump too. I made about 100 rolls total in my 5 years shooting film (yes, only 100 in 5 years). I shoot very few frames, not because of money, simply because this is how I take photos. I've bought a digital camera 6 months ago and have shot around 3000 photos. So, I shot in half a year, the number of exposures I did in 5 years. And I still shoot few frames of a given scene, but now I can shoot pics for friends who need it, for my university studies and a large number of etceteras. I can experiment a lot without worring of costs, and make some money too (low margin income is possible if you don't pay for film and processing. Also, since I'm a few frames shooter, now I don't have to wait a month to finish a roll. I love to have gone digital, I like the results I get, I don't think automation means a shit when taking a good photo, it's about a sharp eye connected to a sharp mind. Believe me I don't miss film, at all. Regards
Albano --- frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I said: "which camera has a higher ratio of > interesting photos to duds?" > > To which Ken Waller responded: > > Gee, and I thought it was the photographer that > took the image not the camera. > > > > Kenneth Waller > > You don't think that some photographers shoot more > digitally because > they can without paying a premium? > > Judging by the number here who proudly trumpeted > (within a couple of > months of buying their *istD), "My shot count is > such-and-such!", I'd > say that most shoot much more when film price isn't > a factor. > > So yes, I did mean "which camera" and not "which > photographer". > > cheers, > frank > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri > Cartier-Bresson > > Albano Garcia Photography & Graphic Design http://www.albanogarcia.com.ar http://www.flaneur.com.ar __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
