On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 08:55:13 +0200 (CEST), Qkano <snapper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote/replied to: >The learning curve is shorter because the learning is curtailed, not because it is accelerated ;o) > >With digital you don't need that huge burden of experience that enabled photographers of old striving "to get it right first time every time". You set up the camera and fire away, review, fire away, review .... It's results that count after all. > >It's a serious comment in a way, but not a "derogatory" one to the digital medium. There is a point where the ability to conduct endless trials really can be "too rapid". The old human brain takes time to assimilate information and the act of planning and thinking is left behind by the ability to obtain instant results. What gets learned (in part) is that it's quicker to fire off a few trials than spend too long thinking ... You speaking from personal experience Bob? I suppose some people just stop learning, but I'm not one of those. I can tell you though from personal experience that I have learned more and faster with digital and I'm not finished by a long shot. I'd go so far as to reverse your thoughts. And that's because unless you keep strict written records of each shot (most people can't be bothered) film makes it tough to learn from. You might get your slides back weeks later. Whereas with digital what you didn't learn while shooting and reviewing you can learn half an hour later at home at the computer. -- Jim Davis, Nature Photography: http://jimdavis.oberro.com/ Motorcycle Relay Kits: http://www.easternbeaver.com/
