Texan, I agree. It is a tough decision to plunk down that kind of funds (dangerously close to $2,000.00) for a camera when after all a disposable camera will take pictures. But this is really more than just taking pictures. It’s about preserving a little piece of our personal history. I’m a little emotional and sentimental right now .... because just a few hours ago I accidentally ran over and killed my pet dog "Smokie". I called my wife and explained the tragedy and her first comment after a long silence and though her sobs were, “I’m so glad you took pictures of him”.
I also got some satisfaction when I took a cardboard box containing four 35mm cameras and a 120 Yashica”D” and donated them to the local college. The professor was ecstatic over the donation and met me in the parking lot to accept the freebies. Colleges still use film to teach photography. AParent, a good 35mm like the Nikon is a great camera no argument there, but imagine being able to do everything you can with your Nikon, double that, immediately assess your work, and then, as you normally do, take those “undeveloped” pictures to wherever you do and enjoy as you have over the years....or.... you can go back to your computer and explore a whole new world of photography while preserving those things in a manner that will bring joy and memories to you and your loved ones for years to come.
Fungo
I use 35mm now. But unfortunately I don't have an autowinder. So the action shots are hit or miss, as you know. This is the real factor that has me wishing for digital. That five shot burst would really do the trick.
But then, we can live for quite a while on $2k, so...
Maybe I'll strike oil sometime soon.
But then, we can live for quite a while on $2k, so...
Maybe I'll strike oil sometime soon.
Has anyon ever converted a VHS tape to DVD?
Fungo - Did you really run over your dog? Geez, I'm really sorry. 
oldbat - I played around with 'mypublisher' last night. Pretty nice. It seemed to have a few bugs? A friend demo'd the 'iphoto' program on Macs for me...seemed more refined.
Another nice tool for free download under the "more" section of Google...Picassa.
oldbat - I played around with 'mypublisher' last night. Pretty nice. It seemed to have a few bugs? A friend demo'd the 'iphoto' program on Macs for me...seemed more refined.
Another nice tool for free download under the "more" section of Google...Picassa.
And someone earlier in this thread said they ran over their zoom lens.
I tell ya', if there is a HSBW convention I'm getting out of the parking lot before any of these folks get into their cars...
I tell ya', if there is a HSBW convention I'm getting out of the parking lot before any of these folks get into their cars...
Guy in our local pro photo store told me he hadn't sold a film camera to a pro in about 5 years. The store had dozens of used
top-of-the-line film cameras...Nikons, Canons, even Leicas for about $250 for a flawless body that had sold for thousands not long ago.
Who bought them, I asked? Film students and art photographers. A few collectors.
He thought that a used film camera was a smarter way to go for some purposes.
I carted by old 35 mm film relic to a few games and had a shop crop and enlarge a few of the best pics. Not a bad way to go. At least I know the pictures won't fade in 5 years.
top-of-the-line film cameras...Nikons, Canons, even Leicas for about $250 for a flawless body that had sold for thousands not long ago.
Who bought them, I asked? Film students and art photographers. A few collectors.
He thought that a used film camera was a smarter way to go for some purposes.
I carted by old 35 mm film relic to a few games and had a shop crop and enlarge a few of the best pics. Not a bad way to go. At least I know the pictures won't fade in 5 years.
Fungo,
I agree that digital cameras have improved dramatically over the past few years. Just like metal bats - they make it much easier to get great results. Nothing wrong with that, and a lot of folks can now enjoy great photos because of them.
I have nothing against them, I am simply quite content with what I have now.
Especially when printer ink cost about $4,992 per gallon. Not to mention the cost of truly archival quality printer photo paper.
I agree that digital cameras have improved dramatically over the past few years. Just like metal bats - they make it much easier to get great results. Nothing wrong with that, and a lot of folks can now enjoy great photos because of them.
I have nothing against them, I am simply quite content with what I have now.
Especially when printer ink cost about $4,992 per gallon. Not to mention the cost of truly archival quality printer photo paper.
Justbaseball,
Very true!
Very true!
Fungo,
So sorry as well
Justbaseball:
I haven't tried iphoto yet, but get their emails all the time, will have to give them a try.........thanks.
So sorry as well
Justbaseball:
I haven't tried iphoto yet, but get their emails all the time, will have to give them a try.........thanks.
quote:Originally posted by micdsguy:
At least I know the pictures won't fade in 5 years.
HP is marketing it's newest photo printer with a garantee that the pics won't fade for 99 years!
Fungo yes you have to convert a RAW file with some software that I'm sure came with your camera. I use the Canon Raw image converter. I only have 4 mp Canon. After converted usually comes out to around 3-4mb. You can make some adjustments with the image converter such as white balance, contrast, sharpness and color saturation. I usually I make some adjustments in Photoshop and save to a Tiff. With RAW and Tiff files you don't lose any information. Usually end up with file size of around 12mb. If you save them to jpeg you will lose some of that info.
I don't print many at home. You can burn them to a disk and take them to you local photo printer.They print them on the same paper they print film photos on. You can get some great 8x10 or larger prints with only a 4mp camera. Yours could do much better I'm sure.
I don't print many at home. You can burn them to a disk and take them to you local photo printer.They print them on the same paper they print film photos on. You can get some great 8x10 or larger prints with only a 4mp camera. Yours could do much better I'm sure.
quote:They print them on the same paper they print film photos on.
I too have most of mine printed elsewhere.
However I question this statement. Prints from negatives are produced by a chemical process, prints from digital a produced by a print process (as far as I know). I think that the paper is different. Film Photo paper has a ton of chemicals on it, which is why it has to be kept in the dark.
All photos (film or digital) will fade depending on several factors. We have a wedding photo hanging on our family room wall. It is out of direct sunlight but has been hanging there for 30 years, it has faded significantly. I don't think we know how long a printed digital picture will last, it depends on the quality of processing, and paper/ink, as well as how it is displayed.
But if you save the orginal file...like the negative...you can always reprint it 10/20/30 years later.
I doubt I'll ever take a film photograph again.
I doubt I'll ever take a film photograph again.
BigWI yes you are right about a different kind of paper.I left out a couple of words I should have inserted. I meant to say " the same quality of paper that film photos are printed on". I do believe digital photos printed on quality paper will last as long as others. Most pros must think the same, they mostly use digital now in my area. I do have a film camera now also but wouldn't buy another one.
quote:But if you save the orginal file...like the negative...you can always reprint it 10/20/30 years later.
And hopefully, the 30yr old CD is not as brittle as my 30 yr old negatives.
Seriously, it is important NOT to buy cheap media. I have a couple of 5 yr old Data disks that cannot be read anymore. I am guessing they were not good quality disks to start with.
I doubt if I will ever take a film picture again either, but I won't say never. Who knows!
I just bought 2 - 100 sheet packs of Epson 4x6 glossy paper ( 2packs for $17) . They claim 100 years without faiding, but will not gaurantee it. That's about 9 cents a picture + ink cost.
Base92, my film SLR is still working (barely) but I decided it was time to replace it. I went to the Canon 20D and am not looking back.
quote:Originally posted by rz1:
Has anyone ever converted a VHS tape to DVD?
rz1
I haven't tried it yet but I have been playing with a software made by Pinnacle called Dazzle designed for movies but can do stills as well. It is SO EASY to use and the results have been very good.
It claims that it can capture analogue as well as digital.
It uses USB connections as well as video ports (the red, white, yellow....don't know the official label
)In time, I plan to hook up my video recorder and "capture" my old VHS movies from 18 years ago when the kid was a baby to move them into the DVD format a little less cheaply than through the drug stores ($49 for 2 hours or something like that....)
I have been very happy with the product so far and it was very reasonable...under $100....for all the features.
Had to add a DVD burner for what I wanted to do but you can make CD-ROM format as well.
I hung another 3 prints around the house tonight...1 more ready to go up when I locate some bare wall space. Wife is starting to lose patience with me. 
You are all partly to blame as this thread has sent me off on a frenzy again.
You are all partly to blame as this thread has sent me off on a frenzy again.
Bluesky:
Capture those VHS movies sooner rather than later - I recently got a DVD recorder and converted mine - and anything older than 10 years had significant dropouts even though for the most part they were top of the line media to start with.
When I asked a friend of mine about this (he is a professional photographer), he advocated making a copy every 5 years.
CD ROMS also have significant issues - I work in the software industry and we find that backup copies from the mid 90s are starting to have fail - and when they fail it is often complete failure - e.g. the entire disk is a writeoff.
As for me, for photos, I have remained with film. Negatives, properly cared for, can last for 50 plus years - I have reprinted pictures from when my parents were in college as part of planning for their 50th wedding anniversary - and the prints were sharp. (B&W).
I continue to be intrigued with digital - and am considering switching - but still find that my Canon Eos 3 with a powerbooster meets all of my needs. I get 7 FPS of high quality images. I can always get them developed with a CD and get a reasonable digital image (some loss).
Capture those VHS movies sooner rather than later - I recently got a DVD recorder and converted mine - and anything older than 10 years had significant dropouts even though for the most part they were top of the line media to start with.
When I asked a friend of mine about this (he is a professional photographer), he advocated making a copy every 5 years.
CD ROMS also have significant issues - I work in the software industry and we find that backup copies from the mid 90s are starting to have fail - and when they fail it is often complete failure - e.g. the entire disk is a writeoff.
As for me, for photos, I have remained with film. Negatives, properly cared for, can last for 50 plus years - I have reprinted pictures from when my parents were in college as part of planning for their 50th wedding anniversary - and the prints were sharp. (B&W).
I continue to be intrigued with digital - and am considering switching - but still find that my Canon Eos 3 with a powerbooster meets all of my needs. I get 7 FPS of high quality images. I can always get them developed with a CD and get a reasonable digital image (some loss).
I've started shopping digitial. Is anyone using fixed focal length lenses? Seems to me that the telephoto lens to 300mm is still too small.
I just stepped out of my office and took some pics. Here are 3 pictures: the smallest at 75mm, the middle sized at 300mm and the largest is 300mm digitally enhanced on the computer. If you have a 6 or 8 megapixel camera, you can do a lot with 300mm.
