jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
There is NO WAY, Ben, that digital can match projected slides,nor will it imho for the forseeable future, that is the main reason I am keeping my film equipment. Does anybody know if it is possible to convert a digital file to a slide, and if so, what is the result?
John Camp
Well-known
It is possible to convert digital to slides -- I don't know if it's still true, but until fairly recently, there used to be conversion businesses around most big universities for people doing academic slide shows. They would convert color computer graphics to slides; whether they could convert photos, with any fidelity, I don't know. It was expensive -- like $6 a slide. But since most academics have gone to PowerPoint, those businesses may have disappeared.
devils-advocate
Member
This is fairly easily done with a film writer, such as the Polaroid ProPalette series. http://www.meyerinst.com/html/polaroid/products.htm
These are often avilable on ebay.
Most big cities should still labs that offer this service as well.
Whether this process can
These are often avilable on ebay.
Most big cities should still labs that offer this service as well.
Whether this process can
Bromo33333
Established
jaapv said:
I think these days it is mostly putting the digital file through a wall projector mostly. It is possible to create transparencies - I have no idea of the costs and so on.
I do know that many magazines require transparencies so that they may be drum scanned - some some will and some won't accept digital submissions (for instance Nationla Geographic will, Arizona Highways won't - they want 4x5 transparencies.)
wolves3012
Veteran
Hard-drive space isn't essential if you're prepared to trust CD/DVD copies.devils-advocate said:Going, and staying, digital is seriously expensive.. You need:
-- more large external hard drives on a regular basis
-- a good LCD monitor
-- a Photoshop licence (ouch!)
-- updates of Photoshop every year or two
-- maybe Lightroom as well
-- SD cards
-- card reader
-- a portable storage device for when you travel with your new baby
-- a good printer
-- expensive printer paper
-- really expensive printer ink
Oh. and don't forget, another $5K when the next model comes out in 18 months
LCD monitors are notoriously poor at colour-rendition so a CRT is better (but bigger). LCD monitors are also poor on resolution compared to CRT (unless you have DEEP pockets).
License for photoshop? It isn't the only program and there are some pretty good freebies around.
SD (or CF or whatever) cards - yes but buy several smaller ones. Flash memory isn't infallible and if a large card dies then (a) you just lost an expensive card and (b) chances are a lot of photos went with it!. Buy several cards and you're likely to have enough storage for trips without portable storage devices.
Card-readers can be useful and helpful but aren't required items.
Printer/ink/paper - agreed but you can also get photos processed externally. Unless you use a laser your photos are also liable to fade (if you print on an inkjet).
Most of the stuff you listed isn't really vital initially. Like a camera system, you can buy in stages, as and when you feel you must have. The only unavoidable bit is the camera itself.
Bob Ross
Well-known
John,John Camp said:
A friend of mine shot a cover shot for a magazine that the editor accepted, but printer was nervous about, since it was a 5MP file from an E-1. He asked if they would accept a slide, got a yes, and had one made. The printer was happy and the cover looked great. Some printer firms still haven't caught up
Bob
K
Kin Lau
Guest
devils-advocate said:
That wasn't a minlab you described, it's a full-service lab. You wouldn't use a minilab anyhow if you wanted to extract the "maximum quality" out of your film shots. With a pro lab, the whole process of doing proofs, touchups, crops etc is more labour intensive and expensive.
Some of my local pro labs accept both film and digital, and will do all the post-processing work for you as well. Either way, you pay.
With digital as with film, a skilled worker can do with less equipment and still produce quality prints/images. The key with more (expensive) equipment, is usually speed and efficiency. The level of _adequate_ equipment as many have posted, is quite reasonable and likely most of our members are already at that level.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Of course, you forgot a 4-year Bachelors of Science degree, a few certified technical courses on computer troubleshooting and jargon, then a Masters in Rhetoric (you'll need that when calling tech. support) followed by a Ph.D. in Philosophy (Ethics in the Information Age).kaiyen said:
Then the 3-year Extended Warranty for every single piece of equipment you buy.
Lots of hard-drive space. Lots.
And a copy of Gabriel García Márquez's "Cien Años de Soledad" with the new epilogue in which José Arcadio Buendía finds himself before a Dark Matter server oracle which has all the perennial, cyclical questions ever brought up by franovskian legions of manic pursuit.
Or, in short: yes, it's more expensive
JohnL
Very confused
If you are already familiar with computers and have one of your own, as most of those who would be in the market for an M8 are and do, then the cost of entry is really just the camera and its immediate accessories, like memory cards and batteries, and maybe an extra lens or two. You will probably soon want some extra software, beyond what comes in the box, but it doesn't have to be the full Photoshop. I use PS Elements II which is now getting a bit long in the tooth. My main editing program is Picture Window Pro, and I also use S-Spline Pro (interpolation), Noise Ninja (noise reduction) and PT Gui (panoramas), each of which was sub-$100 when I got them. Total software cost so far about $400 or so.