dominic-c-sensual-photogra

<p>Hi everyboby,<br>

<br>

I'm raising funds to print, publish and market 1,000 copies of my very first photographic art book (with poems by Peter Godwin).<br>

<br>

Please pledge now @ <a href="https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/938551806/sirens-0" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/938551806/sirens-0</a><br /> <br>

If you just can't contribute, but want to help, I'll be grateful if you share my project on social networks and forums.<br>

<br>

Also, I'd be happy to learn from your own experience with crowd funding campaigns!<br /><br>

Huge thanks in advance.<br /><br>

<br />Dominic<br>

www.facebook.com/dominic.c.art<br /></p>

<p>Thanks very much again, Leigh... ;-)</p>

<p>Ha ha ha... You're right, Leigh! :-) Thanks very much, anyway, for appreciating my work... I'm rather proud of my "raw beauties" too... ;-)</p>

<p>He he... Yeah, UV filter vs Lens hood is a great one! :-D And I'm sure that if I'm starting (again?) the Canon vs Nikon thread, I'll get plenty of posts too...<br>

Seriously now, I couldn't imagine that my initial question would lead to such technical answers, but I at least learnt from them, and that's very positive, despite, like you said, some weird comments. But they also contributed to the fun... ;-)</p>

<p>Scott, do you mean that we're at war? ;-) I'm not sure who'll be the overall winner, but I'm enjoying reading all the posts that remind me of my student years... when we couldn't yet discuss about Jpeg vs Raw, simply because digital photography didn't publicly exist (at the beginning of the '90s)... :-) We were rather talking about E40 or C41 processings... or of the girls on the pictures (Cindy Crawford, Stephanie Seymour, Naomi Campbell...)... he he...</p>

<p>JC: I'm indeed amazed that this thread is full of passion and arguments. I've made my mind anyway and this thread has just confirmed that I've always been right in using Raw. Raw is indeed the "negative"... No need to argue further... ;-) But thanks to all the posts in this thread, I've also learnt more on how other photographers use their cameras. That's very interesting...</p>

<p>Ann: thanks for your post. Well, actually I don't have any problems to shoot in Jpeg if the client requires so. I was just wondering whether Ken Rockwell's article was accurate, and I then got the needed answers... :-)</p>

<p>Peter: I of course use a flash/light meter when I shoot in studio (and even outdoors). Thanks very much, anyway for your clear information & explanations. :-)</p>

<p>Leigh: I fully agree with you and I thank you again for re-assuring me... :-)</p>

<p>Simon: Thanks very much for that great "exposé"... I follow you on all points, definitely! :-)</p>

<p>David & Pierre: Thanks very much for your interesting points of views... :-)</p>

<p>Scott: Thanks very much for re-assuring me too... Once again, I've been using Raw for years and that 's why I was a bit "shocked" by Ken Rockwell's article. Now, regarding the differences of quality between Jpeg & Raw, I'll of course forward your comments to my photo-retouching assistant (he's Indonesian btw)... :-)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks very much again, Leigh, for your further answer.</p>

<p>Hi everybody,<br>

Thanks very much for your sharp answers that say it all. But let me explain further why I did ask the question:<br>

I spent 3 days, last week, shooting models (in a studio) for an American sarong company, and the owner tried to convince to me to shoot directly in Jpeg in order to make file transfers faster and compatible with PC softwares (I use Mac). I didn't follow his advice, although Raw files transfers from my camera to his laptop took a bit longer, but he kept on trying to convince me that he's right by later forwarding me Ken Rockwell's article. Moreover, my photo-retouching artist told me that there were no differences of quality between High Res Jpeg & Raw files...<br>

That's then the reason why I needed your comments, and your answers in way prove that I was right not to follow the sarongs company owner's advice.<br>

Now, here are below a few dedicated answers:<br>

David: I didn't know that Ken Rockwell's article was 3 yo... I unserstand better now.<br>

Hector: I understand a bit more about the man himself now. Thank you.<br>

Daniel: Thanks very much for the advice. I will follow it, when I'm a bit less busy. And, don't worry: I've always been working in Raw, since my very first Digital camera, but, as I'm not an expert in digital technology (I started photography more than 20 years ago, when argentic techniques were still widely used), I needed to clarify the matter. And it is clear to me now that I should keep on shooting in Raw... ;-)<br>

Leigh: I actually fully agree with you. That's why Ken Rockwell's article made me confused.<br>

Scott: ;-)<br>

Marc: He he... It's absolutely true. That's why I've always been working in Raw!<br>

Once again, thanks very much again to all of you, for spending time in answering my question.<br>

Warm regards,<br>

Dominic</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi everybody,<br>

I would like to know what you think of the following article, as it left me rather unconvinced...<br>

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm<br>

Warm regards,<br>

Dominic</p>