Thanks, Of course you have a significant point. I realized the point of
the one liner only after I had responded to Walter's response to me wherein
I actually underlined the fact that his contribution was the one liner but
did not realize what I had said until I sent the post. I guess I owe an
apology to Walter.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Derek Clarke
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 8:33 PM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Cc: derek_c@cix.co.uk
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Digital Shortcomings
Look at the end...
One liners can make serious points, and his was that double-shooting can
make you miss the action.
laurie@advancenet.net (laurie) wrote:
> For the life of me, I fail to understand why Walter Bushell would post a
> message to the list repeating what Karl and Tony said on the list
> already
> without making any further contribution. Did Mr Bushell forget to put
> in
> his own comments and response? That would be the only explanation I can
> think of; or am I missing something.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Walter Bushell
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 9:11 AM
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Digital Shortcomings
>
>
>
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Tony Sleep wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 24 Jun 2001 01:15:00 -0700 Karl Schulmeisters
> > (karlsch@earthlink.net) wrote:
> >
> > > Respectfully, many pros are switching to digital.
> >
> > For newspaper use it's standard now. But I was recently speaking to
> > an AP
> > photographer who was grumbling that he has to try and shoot everything
> > twice now - on dig for the wire, and film for the magazine market
> > which AP
> > are now trying to muscle in on.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Tony Sleep
> > - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner
> > info & comparisons
> >
>
> ____> Heraclites already proved you cannot photograph the same river
> twice.
>
>
