On 21 Jul 2002 at 17:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > With respect to the digital photography question, I'm convinced that it is a > different form of communication than traditional photography. As I say, perhaps > we don't know exactly how yet, but I think some of the implications I mentioned > are enough to make one think about it (the Lewinsky photo example).
Hi Brendan, Digital image capture may have lulled many a PJ into a new mode of operation but I can tell you that given some past not so pleasant experiences where I have accidentally resized or erased sole copies of my digital images I now routinely write my entire digital camera down-load to CD and put them straight in my raw image archive next to my film negs/slides. So in my case it's not changed my practices to a large degree, just made the work-flow much more fluid. Had the Lewinski (film) photo not been properly handled after it was rejected by the editors and sent back to the photographer it wouldn't exist either, and how easy would it have been to scan through a bunch of archive CDs rather than wading through leaves of negs? Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
