Digital BW, The Print

Along those lines: I recently got a Nikon D100, and spent an 
afternoon shooting in a graveyard. At the end, I came home with 6 
images on a 256 MB compact flash (which will store 25 in raw format). 
All of them made it to the print stage. That is by far the most 
keepers I have ever had in an afternoon of shooting (ever!). I shot 
more than 6, but I deleted most of them right there in the field. 
With film, I would easily have burned 3 rolls of 36, with all the 
bracketing.

I have found myself slowing down using the D100, which is great. I 
prefer the contemplative pace in photography. But, there is also the 
instant gratification - download onto the PC, tweak, and print. No 
chemical processing, no scanning.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., James Klebau <jklebau@i...> 
wrote:
> > Jerry,
> > 
> > I'm considering the new Fuji S2 for a move into digicams. I know 
most of
> > the advantages and disadvantages versus film, but something no-
one seems
> > to mention is storage of the image files. If you're going to get 
the max
> > out of the camera, you're going to save a 12 million pixel image 
in raw
> > format or largest tiff, at about 50 MB per image. On my last 
holiday I
> > took about 13/14 films (36 each) so that would be getting on for 
500
> > images at 50MB per image = 25GB!! So I would have to buy a 
portable
> > computer or hard-drive to store them on while I'm away, and then 
instead
> > of putting them all in my filing cabinet until I want to scan an 
image,
> 
> > How are you and others coping with this storage problem that is 
only
> > going to get worse as camera resolutions increase, unless better
> > lossless compression systems appear?
> > 
> > Bob Frost.
> > 
> 
> If I can add a thought:
> 
> If I shot 500 images on a holiday, I would probably cull out most 
of them,
> and would be very pleased if I had more than a dozen that should be 
stored
> at hi res. And maybe there might be another couple dozen of 
personal/family
> images that I would keep, and those might be 18 megs or less each.
>  
> It's so much easier to edit out digital images than film images. 
This is
> something that doesn't seem to get much consideration when people 
are
> comparing digital with film.
> 
> 2 cents.
> 
> Jim