Re: Digital

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 20:47:38 -0800 (PST), "d c" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>I invested in a Sony (uses floppies) a few years ago and later got a Fuji
>(uses memory chip) for non-professional photos.  Have been eyeing the more
>professional models to replace my SLR... and noticed that there is a digital
>Hasselblad.
>
>Besides the immediacy of digital media and savings in film stock and
>developing, is the price of the digital a worthy investment, particularly
>for a wide range of photograph from portrait to outdoors/action?
>
>I've spoken with professional photographers who eschew anything other than
>traditional 35mm and medium format film.

While digitals are getting better, most pros I know shot medium format
film and then scan it using a film scanner. I've seen enlargements
hanging in galleries produced with inkjets that you would swear are on
photo paper.

Despite this, those high megapixel digitals are enticing aren't they?

By the way I hear Occam's Razor -- as is only fit -- has only one
blade and no lubri-strip and thus is the simplest form of razor. How's
that working out? I use the new 3 blade razors and find shaving much
more complex.


-- JC