From: jishnu@nospam.verizon.net   
      
   On 1/9/2015 10:19 PM, Clark F Morris wrote:   
   > On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 09:24:36 -0500, "conklin"   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >> "Michael Finfer"  wrote in message   
   >> news:mZPfw.109818$_R5.56900@fx28.iad...   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 12/1/2014 1:04 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>> DSLR cameras do not seem to handle to very high contrasty scenes as well   
   >>>>> as film did, with shadows going black or highlights washed out.  One   
   >>>>> must do special compensation to get good pictures from such scenes.   
   >>>>> Digital also seems to have less exposure lattitude than film, although   
   >>>>> the meters of modern digital cameras seem to be pretty accurate,   
   >>>>> including being 'smart' enough to realize a train's headlight is not   
   >>>>> part of a scene for exposure determination.   
   >>>   
   >>> There are many pros who will disagree with this.  Digital actually has a   
   >>> much greater ability to handle contrasty scenes, but one needs to handle   
   >>> the shot properly.  It has to be exposed properly.  Graduated neutral   
   >>> density filters, when used properly, are a great tool.  Many digital   
   >>> images need some tweaking on the computer to fulfill their potential.   
   >>> Almost all of the shots that I take get some adjustments, mostly minor,   
   >>> before I show them to anyone.  With about 30 seconds of work on each   
   >>> photo, I can have images that I am pleased with.   
   >>>   
   >>> Newer camera have HDR capability.  They take multiple exposures of a scene   
   >>> and combine them into a photo that could never have been made with film.   
   >>> I even have an app on my phone that does that.  That is probably not the   
   >>> best solution for a moving train, though.   
   >>>   
   >>> Michael Finfer   
   >>> Bridgewater, NJ   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Unless you print out your pictures from digital media, every few years will   
   >> make your storage medium obsolete.  Kodachrome slides are good for 60-100   
   >> years.  Some my father took in 1946 are still perfect.  His 8 mm film of   
   >> steam engines at Catskill, NY, on passenger trains are still as good as the   
   >> day they were taken.  But my cell phone videos of Engine 12 on the Tweetsie   
   >> will not outlast the cell phone.  As for the VHS mini tapes I had for   
   >> several years, they are already showing problems.  But no sense in   
   >> complaining.  All we have now is digital.   
   >>   
   > While digital media may change, the advantage of the digital format is   
   > that a straight copy causes no loss of information unlike copying   
   > negatives or slides.  Note this is true only for straight file   
   > copying.  If a JPEG is opened and then stored there will be a loss of   
   > information because JPEG is a compression which loses information.   
   > Thus having several copies of a picture poses no problem.  Just copy   
   > your files every few years.   
   >   
   > Clark Morris   
   >   
      
   I do so by keeping a private copy and also keeping copies at more than   
   one cloud storage provider including providers such as iCloud and Dropbox.   
      
   Meanwhile my slides which I am sure will last for 100 years also has   
   fungus attacking them. It is a royal pain. So I am converting all of   
   them to digital as fast as I can.   
      
   The fact that someone's cell phone video won't outlast the cellphone is   
   mainly due to pilot error on part of the owner of said cellphone and   
   video, and not an inherent property of the technology in question.   
      
   /J   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)