No, if you're billing someone for the work, you have a responsibility to
deliver an
acceptable product in the least billable hours possible. Sometimes that means
fix first,
sometimes it means fix later. You need to know how to do both so you can make an
intelligent choice.
And yes, in the building example, if you have a PC lens and a digital body it
goes on, that
might be better, although I can get a building dead perfectly straight in
Photoshop with
much less effort and more certainty than any perspective control lens or camera
I've ever
encountered. Given a small final size, you can get acceptable quality with a
fix-later
approach. If it was a full page, then renting the appropriate equipment might
be in order.
Tim Schooler wrote:
> At 12:00 AM 11/28/2002 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >I think it's perfectly valid to "shoot first, fix later" if that's the
> >most expedient way to get it done
>
> For amateurs (and there are good amateur photographers), perhaps it doesn't
> matter.
> If you're billing someone for the work, then you should take the time to
> shoot it
> right. If you goof, then you deal with fixing it later.
>
> >- Say you need a quarter page image of a particular tall building--does it
> >make more sense to shoot a consumer digital and fix the perspective in
> >Photoshop, or dragout the 4 x 5 so you have shifts for perspective control?
>
> This must be a rhetorical question. Obviously the answer is use a lens with
> perspective control.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Tim Schooler
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
