Bob: After reading a couple posts in a computer forum I have a question..... How true is this statement? > You will find that many professional photographers still use film for > most things (6x6 format is still *the* choice for quality hi res > imaging), and only use digital for things that will not need high > resolution. Different fields of photography have different needs - and here in my part of the world (Perth, Western Australia) you'd find: For all but the most specialized medical photography, digital has taken over completely. Wedding photographers seem torn between film and digital, as customers have strong preferences for one over the other OR they want to hedge their bets and have film for longevity and digital for convenience (but they dont want to pay for scanning film - so since it's viewed as 'cheaper' to shoot digi, they ask for that as well) - and both 35mm and 120 have their place. In real estate (marketing) photography it's all digital, and largely done by unskilled casual shooters The high end advertising stuff is almost non existant now, the work being done on the East coast of the country, overseas or pilfered from image stock. Aerial is completely digital. Not sure what the millitary is using, but I remember seeing a *lot* of 120 film cameras going out to auction some time back. the various government departments, mining companies and other large industries don't seem to employ photographers either in-house or contracted any more, most of the work is done with digital cameras in the hands of general employees with shooting skills ranging from non existent to pretty damned good. A lot of the catalogue work for company productions that I know of is done in-house (in many cases, the whole production up to the print stage) by general employees, semi skilled in the use of cameras, or using images pilfered from manufacturers sites. k
