Roy’s post about cost per photo of a digital camera verses a 35 mm
camera complete with film and developing left me wondering how he
computed the cost of the digital camera’s per photo. I have owned my
digital camera for a year and a half now. I have taken almost 2500
photos with this camera to use on my website. My cost for this was
the camera, $600.00, the macro lenses and the adapter, $50.00, light
bulbs, $30.00, and something I really can’t measure at this time, the
time learning to do it. After 18 months, I can take photo’s of
edit and post to my website in about two hours. That is
one hour to take 12 pictures, edit them, and one hour to post them
plus their description on the website. I am slow at this. I use the
basic software that came with the camera, because my old computer
couldn’t handle anything more complicated. I also know, that most
monitors cannot see what my digital camera can see. The computer
monitors have not caught up with the camera technology. I use the
computer to talk to the camera and take the picture after I have made
sure of the lighting, and focus distance to the camera. I can
subtract out the pictures I have goofed on and only transfer the ones
I can use. What do you do with all the slides and pictures you
cannot use? What do you do with the slides and pictures after
everything is said and done? I just hit the delete key. Not much
waste. The digital camera is a tool that will not be obsolete in a
few years, programers have to play catch up. I wish that my husbands
35 mm still worked, for it is a tool I could use along with my
digital. I believe that my digital has saved me the expense of wasted
film from shots that didn’t turn out and saved me space in my closet
as well as the local garbage dump for pictures and slides I no longer
need. The technology is getting better at reproducing pictures and
slides from the digital. The 35 mm will always have a place, but the
digital is here and has its place. Marty Galarneau Galarneau’s Gems
http://www.galarneausgems.com