Selectivity is not my proclivity
In my new found desire to explore and improve my photography skills I've discovered the (not so hidden) cost of this wonderful hobby. Apart from the time required to take the photos, sort through the raw material, make any appropriate edits, and head down to the local developer, photography comes with a large price tag. First, there's the equipment itself. I have a Canon G3 which is somewhere between a point-and-click and a full-blown digital SLR. Ok, it's closer to the point-and-click than the SLR. If cameras were cars, the point-and-click would be a shiny Geo Metro and the digital SLR would be the bad ass Porsche 911. My camera would be a Honda Civic. The analogy made more sense before I wrote it.
My point is, that by all methods of comparision, I have a fairly simple and relatively inexpensive camera. I say "relativey" because in the world of electronic goods nothing is cheap. But I'm happy (for now) despite my intense longing for the Nikon D50, the entry level digital SLR that would make me the photographer I've always wished to be. In the meantime I'll have to salivate over the photos my friend Fiasco captures with her bitchin' digital SLR. But I digress. Of course, the greatest advantage of the digital camera of its film-based predecessors is the lack of film and cost thereof. I love this aspect. No more film. No more paying for film. No more conserving my shots because of the prohibitive cost of purchasing and then developing film. I can now take photos with reckless abandon with absolutely no concern for what is located in my viewfinder/viewscreen. And I do, which only leads me to my current situation: way too many photos.
I know what you're thinking: "But Rube, we love your photos! The more the better!" You're too kind, really. The truth is, though, like most people in this world of digitization, I am losing my discrimination when it comes to choosing subjects. It doesn't cost me anymore to take that extra shot of the mountain top or the car driving down the street even though it's virtually identical to the previous shots. But what's the harm!?!? First, when it's that easy to take a photo there's no reason to choose your subjects wisely and when I say "your" I mean "my" because I'm the one taking the shot. So I end up with a couple of extra image files on my memory card. Big frickin' deal.
Yes, big frickin' deal. The reason why is that I just learend that I have absolutely no restraint when it comes to printing out my photos. I just got my photos back from the Big Bend trip. All 120 of them. I'd say out of the bunch there are 40 unique shots. Out of those there are 20 decent shots and of those, 10 that I really like. I've already posted three of them. Although the price of printing shots has decreased it's still not free. Not that this is breaking the bank just yet but I can see that may eventually be a problem.
So, dear reader, I want to make a promise to you and to myself: from now on I will show more discrimination when it comes to which photos I deem "print worthy" and I will be more honest when designating certain photos as "crap". Yes, it's true, even I, the Great Rube, have the tendency to produce crap every now and then. For those of you who don't believe me, try reading some of my older posts. In the meantime, below you'll find a photo which I feel whole-heartedly deserves to remain in the "hey, that's not too bad" category. I hope you agree. If not, feel feel to leave a comment or write your opinion on the back of a Nikon D50 6.1-megapixel digital SLR camera with 18-55mm and 55-200mm DX Zoom Nikkor lenses, complete with circular polarizer and haze reducer filters and a 1Gig Compact Flash memory card and send it to my apartment.
My point is, that by all methods of comparision, I have a fairly simple and relatively inexpensive camera. I say "relativey" because in the world of electronic goods nothing is cheap. But I'm happy (for now) despite my intense longing for the Nikon D50, the entry level digital SLR that would make me the photographer I've always wished to be. In the meantime I'll have to salivate over the photos my friend Fiasco captures with her bitchin' digital SLR. But I digress. Of course, the greatest advantage of the digital camera of its film-based predecessors is the lack of film and cost thereof. I love this aspect. No more film. No more paying for film. No more conserving my shots because of the prohibitive cost of purchasing and then developing film. I can now take photos with reckless abandon with absolutely no concern for what is located in my viewfinder/viewscreen. And I do, which only leads me to my current situation: way too many photos.
I know what you're thinking: "But Rube, we love your photos! The more the better!" You're too kind, really. The truth is, though, like most people in this world of digitization, I am losing my discrimination when it comes to choosing subjects. It doesn't cost me anymore to take that extra shot of the mountain top or the car driving down the street even though it's virtually identical to the previous shots. But what's the harm!?!? First, when it's that easy to take a photo there's no reason to choose your subjects wisely and when I say "your" I mean "my" because I'm the one taking the shot. So I end up with a couple of extra image files on my memory card. Big frickin' deal.
Yes, big frickin' deal. The reason why is that I just learend that I have absolutely no restraint when it comes to printing out my photos. I just got my photos back from the Big Bend trip. All 120 of them. I'd say out of the bunch there are 40 unique shots. Out of those there are 20 decent shots and of those, 10 that I really like. I've already posted three of them. Although the price of printing shots has decreased it's still not free. Not that this is breaking the bank just yet but I can see that may eventually be a problem.
So, dear reader, I want to make a promise to you and to myself: from now on I will show more discrimination when it comes to which photos I deem "print worthy" and I will be more honest when designating certain photos as "crap". Yes, it's true, even I, the Great Rube, have the tendency to produce crap every now and then. For those of you who don't believe me, try reading some of my older posts. In the meantime, below you'll find a photo which I feel whole-heartedly deserves to remain in the "hey, that's not too bad" category. I hope you agree. If not, feel feel to leave a comment or write your opinion on the back of a Nikon D50 6.1-megapixel digital SLR camera with 18-55mm and 55-200mm DX Zoom Nikkor lenses, complete with circular polarizer and haze reducer filters and a 1Gig Compact Flash memory card and send it to my apartment.
posted by The Rube at Monday, May 22, 2006
3 Comments:
"Yes, it's true, even I, the Great Rube, have the tendency to produce crap every now and then."
Only every now and then??!!!?? Maybe you need to increase the fiber in your diet or purchase a delightful package of Ex-Lax. Now in easy to swallow chocolate chew form.
I love your pictures Rube. You should use some of your blog space to post collages of your favorite pics cobbled together for our viewing pleasure! Oh, lest I forget. Congratulations on the new addition to the Rube family. Sounds like a great camera.
Yeah, I so feel your pain on the expensive nature of the whole photography thing! It's so hard not to drool on the beautiful cameras they have in the store where I get my photos printed.
It could be worse, though - you could be one of those crazy people who feels compelled to create scrapbooks from all those photos. I don't even think about how much that hobby costs me!!
Thanks - I didn't know you salivated over my photos. :)
The D50 went through another price drop. There's a package with a 18-55mm lens too. The only drawback is that there's no depth-of-field preview. But I found out the hard way that Canon has atrocious customer service, and that's part of why I converted to Nikon. Just do it!!
Post a Comment
<< Home