On 23/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >Hey, if the cards are such a good deal, if shooting digital >is such a good deal, there should be no hesitancy in getting >as many cards as you can afford and shooting at the highest >resolution possible. And of course, if need be, some kind >of portable storage device to hold the image information. >Maybe I'm obtuse, but it sure seem that the comments in this >thread are counter to the comments made by some of the same >people in the earlier thread. > >So, what am I missing here, folks ;-))
Shel, I have never hidden the fact that I shoot large/fine jpeg. My criteria for selecting a suitable resolution for the vast majority of my shooting were these: What level of quality would be required to produce good inkjet prints at a maximum of 16"X11"? What was the trade-off between RAW and large/fine jpeg WRT how many pics would fit in a reasonable space of memory (CF cards). Two test prints, side by side, illustrated to me that there was no visible difference between RAW and large/fine jpeg, so the answer was clear cut for me. BTW, I have never said that shooting digital is a good deal. I have always said that I have enjoyed it - it is a hobby, and as such I don't have to be able to justify the cost, like anyone doing it for money would have to. I've got half-gig cards and that's all I want to pay. For me it's all about having fun and not justifying anything! LOL. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
