Chicken or Egg?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Simon Marchini, Jul 23, 2003.

  1. What is the point of digital photography? The reason I ask this question is
    because the more I read magazines covering the subject they appear to spend
    a lot of their time explaining how to improve the poor shot you got. This
    seemed some what strange as I have always believed that the objective of
    photography was to take a good shot in the first place - then improve on
    them.

    It has been my experience that the best digital images I have produced were
    based on photos that stood up on their own in the first place. Surely, we
    should always strive to produce a good image first otherwise digital
    photography is really digital development?

    It is even stranger that so much energy seems to be put into improving
    ordinary images when one of the great benefits of digital cameras is the
    ability to edit as you go and discard the poor shot. This should improve
    the chance of producing the good image. This is also helped by the
    limitless number of images that could be taken on a modern memory card
    before it is downloaded on to a PC or Mac.

    Perhaps the point of digital photography is that it is a total process
    rather than being good with a camera and being good as film/picture
    developer/printer.

    So which does come first the digital image or digital manipulation?
     
    Simon Marchini, Jul 23, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Simon Marchini

    Canongirly Guest

    I think Sonys' current advertising answer that question. As with any camera,
    it doesn't matter how good the camera is it's the user that composes the
    picture... hence Sonys' ad, "5 million pixels but no eye for a good
    picture?"
     
    Canongirly, Jul 24, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Simon Marchini

    Mark M Guest

    There is deception in the current perceived difference with film shooters in
    this regard, though.

    Most print film images shot by the masses are NOT properly exposed at
    ll! -It's just that negative film has such latitude that the
    processor/developers can correct even GROSS mistakes made by snapshooters.
    With digital, you take this action YOURSELF if you mis the exposure.

    Print film has such latitude that people needn't worry much about nailing
    exposure. While the latitude in digital is there, it requires the same
    adjustment that print film does.
     
    Mark M, Jul 24, 2003
    #3
  4. Simon Marchini

    Tumbleweed Guest

    <snip>
    Same would be true of 35mm camera mags, and certainly was pre-digital
    (havent read a mag in years)
     
    Tumbleweed, Jul 24, 2003
    #4
    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.