[LargeFormat] The Big Digit

[largeformat@f32.net]

Uncle Dick,

I myself am also just an amateur that would like to make some money. So your 
ahead of me. In any case I as well as many of us on this list I'm sure have 
read these kind of debates in recent months.  What I don't understand is what 
difference it makes how the heck we all capture, burn or get the shot we so 
desire at the time. I don't understand why any photographer cares how the 
other guy did that shot. Other than if you wish to achieve a similar type of 
image. Then the technical aspect of the shot is important. I know we all like 
to know how an image was done so we might adapt that to how we shoot. But 
what I do get tired of is the debate of which is better. They both are good 
in there own right for somebody. 

I have no problem with the new tech if I could afford it. But I have to admit 
I like using film. I like the process. I like the challenge of making it 
work. Perhaps I'm just not busy enough to appreciate the convenience of the 
digital world yet. Or perhaps I'm just stupid and don't understand. Perhaps 
if I get to the point having alot of  work I'll find I have to be digital. 
But again I ask why is either bad? When we all used film the only thing we 
debated was photography. How did you do that, not my car is better than your 
car. I look at all this stuff as tools and techniques. For me if it works for 
you great. If something ells works for me why should that be bad. Are we all 
not just photographers?

Greg
geo

When in danger or in doubt run in circles scream and shout.