Korean Job Discussion Forums

The Lemon · Joined: 11 Jan 2003

If you're like most digital camera owners, you probably won't often make prints, but will save pictures on your hard drive, or on CD.

If you do make prints at a photo place, you can take in a CD with the image file that you edited and burned at a PC bang (one great advantage of digital is it allows you to correct colours & to some extent exposure prior to printing), or the memory card your camera uses, and tell the shop, "print #4, #7, and #19 please".

If you have a computer already, you can buy a reasonably cheap printer (70~100,000w, more for the really good 6 colour ink ones) that makes EXCELLENT photo prints, if you use proper big-league photo paper @ 18,000w for 20 sheets. Prints from mine are of a subjectively higher quality than film prints at the local store, though the inks are more prone to fading if left exposed to air.

GirlFromMars · Joined: 15 May 2003 Location: Corea do Sul

don't forget also that one of the great benefits of a digi cam is how easy it is to upload pics to a web album so friends and family can share all your new experiences. it beats having to scan them hands down.

this was my main reason for choosing a digicam over slr, i have a huge bag of photos from my 2 years away from home that i have to lug around each time i travel (well i could send them home).

also i agree with lemon on the printer, they are very cheap to buy (not sure about running costs) and print terrific pics.

GFM

syclick · Joined: 23 Mar 2003 Location: Seoul

I agree with GirlFromMars, having a digicam is MUCH easier, and I'm still able to get professional-looking results. Especially if I take the time to tweak the photo in Photoshop afterwards.

I am an amateur, so being able to see the photo immediately gives me the ability to figure out what I need to change to get a better shot.

Plus, I share a lot of photos with my friends and family over the web.

I never delete photos, I always archive 'em on CDR. Convenient and small.

Sure, they lack a certain warmth that analog cameras have - even at ultra-high resolutions. If you are specifically looking for warmth, go analog.

The Lemon · Joined: 11 Jan 2003

Canuck · Joined: 05 Apr 2003

All im gonna say is that digital is evil.

ulsanchris · Joined: 19 Jun 2003 Location: take a wild guess

I liked the suggestion of going for both. Look for good used cameras. there are lots of them out there, although finding a good used digital might be hard to find. If you go for a digi get at least 3mp That will give you decent pictures.
Has anybody else noticed how crappy photo processing is in this country. It really sucks or maybe just all the places in ulsan suck. This time around i'm sending my film back home to be developed. MOre expensive for sure but this way i don't feel like I just wasted my money on crappy prints and feel that i should have them redone.

Zyzyfer · Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2003 5:41 pm Post subject:

I remember hearing that the non-digital cameras have a much higher resolution than a digital camera could ever hope to have...dunno if it's true or not, but having both handy is the best bet.

I've been thinking about whether or not to purchase a digital camera.

Good-You can show family quite easily through the internet. Can be very cheap to develop, if you invest in the equipment. Instant product.

Bad-You need to be computer savvy, and that initial investment isn't cheap, either. You need a printer and a CD burner for maximum effectiveness. I *think* the resolution isn't as high as on a normal camera. Can be difficult to find a place to develop digital photos if you don't live in *ahem* Seoul.

The Lemon · Joined: 11 Jan 2003

ulsanchris · Joined: 19 Jun 2003 Location: take a wild guess

digi cams are the way of the future, but for the moment I would put my money in buying a film camera. they take better pictures, have faster shutter speed, and operate in more extreme conditions, better in colder and warmer weather. also film is still fairly cheap.
This might interest you. A lot of professional photographers have switched to digital. Of course they have the top of the line digital slrs. Most of the ones who have switched are news and sports photographers.

Canuck · Joined: 05 Apr 2003

Dont you just find that digital cams are inherently wrong? For me, digital photography smacks of laziness. "Well gee, I cant take a propers shot so I will cheat and use photoshop". Its 100% true that digital photographs have absolutely no warmth. I will stand by my opinion. Digital is evil.

waterbaby · Joined: 01 Feb 2003 Location: Baking Gord a Cheescake pie

I think people run into problems with digital (be it still or moving pics) as an artform when they try and recreate or expect the same effects of real film. Experiment and play with what digital has to offer Very Happy

Bulsajo · Joined: 16 Jan 2003

I can't add anything new to what's already been said, but I think in summary you really have to think about what you want a camera for- how fast do you want to have the pics, how often will you be wanting photo-lab quality hard prints, etc.

Digital has its uses but I still use an SLR and a scanner to get my photos digital. Of course this also has its own set of drawbacks- I still have to finish the whole roll up, take it to the developer, pay, then scan the photos I want to digitize. If I take a bad shot I have no way of knowing until the film comes back from the developer. If there's one particular pic I want to email to somebody I still have to wait until I've used the whole roll up. But to get the same quality out of a digital I'd probably need a new printer, and I'd be spending a fortune on photo-printer paper.

One way around this is to burn the digital pics on a cd and take it in to a photo-lab, but then you've really got to do some cost analysis on what you're spending per print. If money is an issue (and when isn't it?) you have to take cost per print into consideration. It's a little like shopping for printers- you can't just look at the sticker price on the printer- you have to look at the price on ink cartridges and how many pages the cartridge will last on average. Of course if having lots of high quality prints isn't a priority then you don't have to worry this.

I like my SLR but if I was in the market for a camera right now I'd go for a good digital. I'd like to buy a digital camera but am not yet ready to spend a whack of $ on one that will be of high enough quality to come close to replacing my SLR. I see my future dilemma being trying to decide which camera to bring with me when I go out, and I don't want to lug around 2 cameras...

A word for that 'luddite' Canuck on photoshop- I've been able to scan SLR prints that hadn't turned out and were pretty much garbage into decent enough digital pics using software; When you'll never get another chance to shoot the same pic again, it becomes an invaluable tool.

hojucandy · Joined: 03 Feb 2003 Location: In a better place

i have several cameras, including some large format monsters that require porters and a mule to carry round.

my favourite two cameras are my early 60's nikkormat SLR and my 2001 model canon ixus-5 digital.

the nikon SLR weighs a lot but it is phenomenally rugged. i once dropped it off a 15 metre cliff onto rocks and it sustained only a few scratches and broken filter. it is this feature that drew me to this model and i scoured the secondhand shops of australia looking for it. yu can hammer nails in with it. it also never claps out in extreme humidity. i have used it in caves, in rainforest, ad in papua new guinea highland villages. i generally just shoot with a 50mm lens, with a nice 1.8 maximum aperture. the cost of developing and printing is getting irksome these days.

the digital camera is about 2.2 megapixels. i would like something better but they tend to be larger. i love my digital because it is so small and light. i use it a hundred times more than my SLR. it is a more social camera - for "snaps". it can take rather crappy little videos too - which have remarkably good sound. the best hing - it is free to use. i upload the shots to my mac, fiddle with them a bit and then archive them on cd's.

i dislike using commercial development services. places ike the ones in E-Mart here will destroy your negatives.

to me the choice is this - if i have access to a darkroom or a good processor i'd use my SLR. also for serious projects - when i really want a good photo to print.

but for everyday snap-shots - the digital gets my vote.

Zyzyfer · Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2003 5:14 pm Post subject:

Harpeau · Joined: 01 Feb 2003 Location: Coquitlam, BC

A few weeks ago, we purchased an Olympus Digital Camera at Jean Coutour Drug Store. It was on sale for $200 Canadian! It's 2.0 Megapixel, 2.5 X zoom and auto-connects to a USB port.

We save our picts to the computer and then can print them out or keep them on disk. We've taken many photos over the last month. Our only complaint is the batteries. We're hoping to purchase rechargeable ones pretty soon.

we have a Canon at home and it's a sexy machine, but this one is so compact and is awesome!

It's nice having both.
Regards,
Harpeau[/img]