On Friday, 25 September 2015 13:37:14 UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 25/09/2015 11:56, whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 24 September 2015 20:45:59 UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2015 16:44, whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 24 September 2015 15:44:03 UTC+1, NY wrote:


Yes, I suspect that some of the "film is better than digital"
is like the old "LP is better than CD", which relies partly on
personal preference and partly on "it's better because I say
it's better", the old "stands to reason" defence :-)

nothing to do with that.

If you were teaching sonmeone how to sign would you employ
someone that could sing or introduce them to an auto-tuner.

which is best for teaching singing.


What's that got to do with digital or film cameras?

the differnce between gettin the picture you want and getting a snap
shot.

More rubbish, there are a few people about that can get decent pictures
from film cameras so not all film is snap shots.

No idea where that sentance came from.
There are a number of people that can get decent results with film.
There's alos plenty of peole that can't take a good picture with a digital camera.


what you see on the LCD of a digital camera isn't the same as what
you get as the captured image, but then again only someone that knows
a bit about photography.

What you see through the view finder isn't what you get on film and what
you get on print isn't what you got on the film either. But at least you
can see if its close on a screen.

close in what sense ?
Are you sure all those 'photographers' you see taking flash picures at the olmypics and other stadiums are getting what they see on the LCD. ?

Seems quite common to see loads of people flashing didn't see that even 20 years ago.



Are you comparing iPhones to SLRs and saying the SLR is better
because its manual?

No. I'm saying that to teach photgraphy film is a better option
because as you've proved digital has many distractions such as the
LCD which as you claim shows you in advance what you 'get'.

So what do you recommend a box brownie so all you can change is the
viewpoint and the lighting?

No but being able to change shutter speeds and aperature are a
distict advantage when teaching photography which is why you can't really teach photography on a mobile phone.


That will teach a lot about photography and
you can buy a digital to do that.

you can learn photgraphy without a camera.




Why does the tutor need to be able to sing?

They don't have to be. But would yuo take singing advice
from someone that couldn't sing but have a really good auto tuner ?



Do you just want to copy
someone else? Is that your idea of photography, being able to copy
someone else?

In order to be able to copy someone else you need the skills.
Whether it be singing or photography.

If you want to know how to cook a book on microwave cooking is hardly the way, but you can make yourself something to eat.
Cooking and reheating AREC differnt you may not be able to tell but other can.