If only they had taken the threat of digital technology seriously; they would still be a "Global" player.
Hey-ho! They didn't and they aren't. Digital technology has spawned a whole new generation of "photographers" who, armed with their computer operated equipment, record images of stunning clarity and composition. Quite how much credit is due to the technology is unknown - but there's no seven year apprenticeship to become a master of photoshop! The clock will never tock - tick backwards and the advances in image capture will continue apace. I see that Nokia will be selling a phone with a 41 mega pixel sensor - my Canon 400d is 10.1 mega pixel.
A Hoverfly sp. in Sye & Yve's back garden. (Sunday morning) |
Two years ago they were still digi-scoping! It is a crazy world and the speed of technological advance is unlikely to slow down. Anyone who has the funds and desire to chase these advances will be at the forefront of digital image capture - me? I happily plodding along at the back of the queue. A good camera doesn't suddenly become a bad one when new advances are marketed - it just becomes less fashionable (very much like me!)
A Thick-headed Fly - Sicus ferrugineus - in our garden on Monday |
A Hoverfly sp. - a Sphaerophoria sp. (probably scripta) in the garden this morning |
I've accompanied this nonsense with some images from the past four days - using the 170 - 500mm with my extension tubes to capture some of the insects which have crossed my path. Certainly not the best efforts available on the network - yet plenty good enough for a simple blog?
Steve,
ReplyDeleteIf the original image is of a decent quality, we shouldn't need to use photoshop to "improve" it? The guys who learnt their trade using conventional cameras and film had to make every effort count, if they were in the business. Mistakes were costly in time and money.
Today we can happily snap away; no constraints on the number of shots (we don't have to change a roll of film after every 36 exposures)and no expense involved in getting the results developed. In this computerised age, we are fortunate to have instant access to our results on the back of our cameras. For us digital age bloggers to start harping on about image quality is farcical - as if we earn our living from posting pretty pictures in cyberspace?
Blogging is about sharing experiences, not a shop window for wannabe photographers - there are plenty of other avenues open to the individual who wishes to become a "wildlife photographer" only you might just come up against the likes of Hugh Miles and Simon King and realise just how inferior your images really are in comparison to professional cameramen who have undertaken a lifetimes apprenticeship?