jstuedle
No longer a newbie, moving up!
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2005
- Messages
- 4,889
- Reaction score
- 15
- Location
- S.E. Indiana
- Website
- www.picture-daddy.com
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
How many megapixels do you guys need? You can work with 4 but 16 is plenty for a full frame 35mm sensor. And 40??? Give me a break. Yes, I'd love to have a play with it but unless I have a specialist need for it, it can stay in the shop.
I can remember "back in the day" when talking of breaking the 640K ram barrier in the PC, being asked "just how much RAM does a guy need?". Technology will always grow, and we will always look back on it in amazement and ask "how did we get by with such limitations?".
Digital is just way too expensive - unless you're budgeting to a 5 year plan.
So I think as long as film has a warmer character and is 10 x cheaper, it will always be the prefered option for some - even if the rest are playing with 192bit gigapixels.
There will come a time when digital will be cheap, much more so than film. All too soon film will loose it's "economy of scale" as more and more manufacturers shut down and move on to "new and better" technologies. Film will go the way of the buggy whip and will be reserved for the elite artisan, well out of reach of the weekend point and shooters.
To bring the thread back on topic. If you shoot a lot, and many of us do, digital is already cheaper than film. Economy of scale has already entered into the equasion. I shoot things that I may not have with film, just because the camera is always with me and there is no cost per frame untill I go to print. To shoot 10,000 frames is really not a lot if the camera is an extension of you, the person. What I see with my camera. Pushing the shutter is just a reflex.