Digital World

[eyadnalsamman]

I am not if the digital software supports widely and strongly the saying [Fake

your digital photo, it may not be a true shot]. Could you simply tell me why

could a professional photographer turns to a digital photography? Maybe it

needs a try and maybe it is time for digitizing everything. I need to get your

appreciated comments.

[hatley]

Speed. For photojournalism you can store a whole lot more than 36 exposures on a large flash card. You can get your photos to your editor much faster, especially if you are in a different city.

[brooks short]

Speed, workflow and control.

[frank_skomial]

Instant feedback - instant picture verification. Low cost of processing, after initial investment in computer and DSLR camera/lenses.

[mike butler]

Ultimately, a pro converts to digital because his clients prefer receiving the work in that form.

Outside of photojournalism, commercial photography is a lot of show business, which was

true for film, too.

[GerrySiegel]

Once an image is converted from its pixels to digital ones and zeros,it becomes just a simple math problem for a computer to fidget with it,play with it,send it by telephone and cable wires almost at light speed. It is the same as in music,where sound is reduced to a "file." If anyone has tried to keep track of a life's work in Vue All Neg Savers of Polyethelene and then recover them,or slides, and then recover them,there is a genius in being able to sort and store in digital files. So it becomes,Eyad,a matter of "housekeeping." Kind of tarnishes the glamour,but that is how I have seen the move to digital imaging popularity. Exception: I will always keep my analog Seth Thomas Ship's Bell Clock in repair. Mainly because I love gears and pawls and wheels and think they are prettier than a little crystal and a battery clock movement. I digress,but the analog world still has its lovers too..Digital makes housekeeping so much easier. And allows the latest generation,brought up in computerese and plug ins and such to use all those computer lab classes and keep off the streets and out of pubs,you know what I mean I think...GS

[Jerry_]

It (the digital revolution) has to do with good advertising hype.

 

 

 

 

Everyone could own a basic Ford or Chevy sedan, one model for the entire population, gas mileage at 44 mpg on the road or in the city. The same features in each vehicle.... But advertising hype requires you to go for a Lexus or a SUV Lincoln (truck) to show that you have arrived.

 

 

 

 

 

A Nikon F5 (or the F6) makes images on film. Scan the images into your computer' and you have more megapixels than you need to tinker with and alter after the fact. But advertising hype has created the idea that a 'new, improved' digital camera body will make you a "better" photographer. The art of photography is capturing a moment of time, be it on film or on a memory card. Waiting for delivery of a Nikon D2Xs body is not going to get your 'image' at the present time, but if you are stuck using a Nikon F100 and film, you can do your thing right now.

 

 

 

 

It's all about advertising....and hype.<div></div>

[hatley]

<i>"A Nikon F5 (or the F6) makes images on film. Scan the images into your computer' and you have more megapixels than you need to tinker with and alter after the fact. But advertising hype has created the idea that a 'new, improved' digital camera body will make you a "better" photographer."</i>

<br><br>

 

I don't know that it has all that much to do with a perception that digital makes better photographs - most folks I know who are just starting in photography still respect film as the epoch. I can't count how many times folks have said something like "oh but I just use a little digital point and shoot". But anyway, not to get strangled in a digital vs wet process debate.

<br><br>

The bottom line is that with chemical process, it takes a lot more time to either process or have your film processed, then scan it in than it does to just shoot the image and then access it immediately. That makes digital much more condusive to newspaper photojournalism, hype or no hype. In that particular segment of photography, time to press is paramount.