Digital BW, The Print

Did anyone else see the "insert photo"  in National Geographic ( 
sometime in the last year or so I believe) , near the editors comments, 
where they showed the film used on a typical National Geographic shoot 
these days. 1000 rolls of 36exp is the norm, and perhaps they use 12 
pics in the final article.



On Nov 30, 2003, at 12:43 PM, 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote:

>> sceptre12345 wrote:
>>> I'm simply amazed at the number of shots taken by digital
>>> photographers these days. (This is not a digital vs film thing).
>>> I guess technology allows it and why not use it, since it doesnt
> cost
>>> more to take 50 or 300 shots if you have the memory cards.
>>
>> Why be amazed?
>
> Yes I'm amazed. Shooting 645 format, I usually don't come home with
> 300-500 shots in a day and I can't go thru my film with a delete key!
>


________________________________________________________

Dr. Robert Young
ALI Database Consultants
1151 Williams Dr
Aiken SC 29803
USA

WWW: http://www.aliconsultants.com
Tele: 1-803-648-5931
Toll free in US: 1-866-257-8970 Fax:1-803-641-0345
Email: rcyoung@...
"Source of Rdb Controller, software for database analysis &  
performance tuning"

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Robert Young 
<rcyoung@a...> wrote:
> Did anyone else see the "insert photo"  in National Geographic ( 
> sometime in the last year or so I believe) , near the editors 
comments, 
> where they showed the film used on a typical National Geographic 
shoot 
> these days. 1000 rolls of 36exp is the norm, and perhaps they use 
12 
> pics in the final article.
> 
Robert,

Are you kidding ? 36000 shots for 12 pics! 
Perhaps you meant 100 rolls of films ?
Cheers,
Andre

sceptre12345 writes:

> Are you kidding ? 36000 shots for 12 pics!
> Perhaps you meant 100 rolls of films ?

No, for NG, 36,000 exposures for 12 pictures sounds about right.

I remember reading or hearing many years ago that a thousand rolls was not 
uncommon for a NG project.  Compared to the other costs of getting a crew 
to the top of Mount Everest (or the middle of the rain forest or wherever) 
what's a few hundred more rolls of film?  They probably got a box car 
discount on the stuff anyway.

Cheers,
Kip

At 11/30/2003 07:38 PM +0000, you wrote:

>--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Robert Young 
><rcyoung@a...> wrote:
> > Did anyone else see the "insert photo"  in National Geographic (
> > sometime in the last year or so I believe) , near the editors comments,
> > where they showed the film used on a typical National Geographic shoot
> > these days. 1000 rolls of 36exp is the norm, and perhaps they use 12
> > pics in the final article.
> >
>Robert,
>
>Are you kidding ? 36000 shots for 12 pics!
>Perhaps you meant 100 rolls of films ?
>Cheers,
>Andre