34 replies to this topic

[anam]

The source itself is digital because all professional SLR cameras are digital now. Print itself is a conversion. So scanning these photos are like making coke out of water then filtering the coke to get the water back (which won't be pure water).  

[Rockstar6662]

anam, on May 3 2012, 01:27 PM, said:

The source itself is digital because all professional SLR cameras are digital now.

Not actually true. A lot of professionals still use film, maybe for only specific films but digital isn't the be all and end all of taking photographs. There's effects and qualities to film in some circumstances which you can't get in the digital domain, no matter how much post-processing you do.

Quote

Print itself is a conversion. So scanning these photos are like making coke out of water then filtering the coke to get the water back (which won't be pure water).  

True, print is a conversion but if all you're going to do is put the picture on a web page etc, then a decent scanner will produce a perfectly good version for that.

If you want to blow it up to A3 or bigger then yes, a hi-res digital file will be needed but ideally you'll also want the RAW file rather than the compressed jpeg and how many people would know how to process a RAW file properly?

There's pros and cons to both. Neither is ultimately right or wrong. SOme people want a mix, some want digital, some want prints. You'll never convince one that the other is the best way to go. So we will see what happens.

[Too Tall]

Guys and Gals,

The other thread already went down hill with this discussion and Jason closed it.

http://showmasterson...showtopic=75622

So let's just keep this to a nice happy pole  

[johnhuk]

TerraHawk, on May 3 2012, 01:06 PM, said:

Not_Pennys_Ship, on May 3 2012, 07:35 AM, said:

Printed.

It would be quicker to receive and scan (and upload) then to wait, and wait, and wait for the digital image to come through.

Previous experience: Nicole Scherzinger (Men In Black 3, American X-Factor, spam Cat Dolls), photo session started at 19:30.  Session ended 20:30.  Concert started 21:15.  Concert finished 22:45.  Photos received..the next day 10:00am.  

Digital is a silly idea IMHO.

If you have both, whats the urgency for the digital copy?

Its in the advantage of the organiser to get it to you quickly - on a three day event a same day return might let you post it online Friday, and tempt others to get one too on by the Sunday.

But you still might recieve  yout digital backup before you had a chance to scan it yourself at work.

johnhuk, on May 3 2012, 09:29 AM, said:

Printed.

Agree with NPS.

Also, your PC crashes, hard drive fails etc. Digital image gone! Get a strong enough folder to transport your photos in a you'll be fine! Get a decent scanner and you can scan it yourself.

If your PC crashes it would still be on online servers. Far easier to retrive than if your house burns down, someone runs off with your folder etc. Photo gone! Get yourself several backups, get more copies printed if you wish, and your'll be fine.

Digital copy gone! I'll get another. Photo gone! Bugger.

Surely its more silly an idea having a digital image (its taken with a digital camera after all), converting to a hard print, then making a new digital image from that.

You're assuming everyone backs up somewhere, somehow online of course. I'd rather have something physical as well rather than a string of 1s and 0s!

[anam]

Rockstar6662, on May 3 2012, 01:47 PM, said:

You'll never convince one that the other is the best way to go.

Who is trying to convince that one is the BEST (although I still think Digital is best for storage and future reproduction)? Doesn't even matter if one is better or not. My entire point is that if you provide both then everyone is happy :)

[TerraHawk]

johnhuk, on May 3 2012, 05:48 PM, said:

I'd rather have something physical as well rather than a string of 1s and 0s!

I'm not anti-physical. I still buy CDs. There is a lot to be said for physical media - Can't sign a download -  and if needs be you can always sell it. But I'll still rip my CDs to MP3 if they aren't included with my CD purchase. The best of both worlds.

[prettyconfusd]

I choose both.

It's highly unlikely the photos will be taken on anything other than a digital SLR and a lot of people store their photos on their computers now and just print out those they need.

I'd like a printed photo that I can get signed but I would also like a digital copy that I can easily post online to Facebook and email etc.

For those saying that a digital file can be easily lost, it's actually a lot easier for a physical file to be lost. At least if your hard drive breaks or something there's software that can recover most things (I did this with amazing success last year, was able to recover about 95% of my files after a failure) but if your physical photo is stolen, lost or burned or any number of other horrible things, it's gone and there's absolutely no chance of replacement.

I can understand people wanting digital only but find it amazing people would only want a physical copy, especially when we're talking Star Trek fans. I assumed they'd be more likely to be living with a foot in slightly more modern times.

Either way, digital photos are the norm nowadays, film is for a niche market and event holders such as Showmasters really should be getting to grips with providing people with digital photos. Heck, even those nitwits on The Apprentice managed to get photos onto disc for people for one other their tasks so I'm sure a professional outfit such as Showmasters should at the very least be able to match them.

Or, if burning a disc is a bit too complex and time consuming then when the order number is taken (which will be needed for collection) couldn't it be tied in with the booking registration number also? Then they can be collected online after the event?

Or if all else fails, why not just let those who have paid to get a photo also get one taken using their own phone/digicam too? Then those who want a digital copy get one with no fuss (and no responsibility for Showmasters to process them for delivery) and those who don't want one don't need to worry.

The idea that we might not get a digital copy is amazingly the only thing that's really annoying me about the plans for this event (even more than the amazing price I've paid for a platinum ticket and still had to pay extra for photos!) and I hope it's sorted out by the time October comes.

Does Facebook, Flickr, Instagram, Picassa etc. mean nothing? These are some of the biggest names out there right now in photos and not one of them is physical media. As for physical media, Kodak anyone?

[anam]

prettyconfusd, on May 10 2012, 08:46 PM, said:

I choose both.

Does Facebook, Flickr, Instagram, Picassa etc. mean nothing? These are some of the biggest names out there right now in photos and not one of them is physical media. As for physical media, Kodak anyone?

prettyconfusd, those are very non confusing statements! LIKE!!!

[TommyT]

prettyconfusd, on May 10 2012, 08:46 PM, said:

The idea that we might not get a digital copy is amazingly the only thing that's really annoying me about the plans for this event (even more than the amazing price I've paid for a platinum ticket and still had to pay extra for photos!) and I hope it's sorted out by the time October comes.

Not looking to stir trouble, just looking to save you unnecssary unfulfilled hope - you may have missed this post - "at present we have no plans to offer digital images of the photo shoots at DSTL"

[prettyconfusd]

TommyT, on May 10 2012, 11:03 PM, said:

prettyconfusd, on May 10 2012, 08:46 PM, said:

The idea that we might not get a digital copy is amazingly the only thing that's really annoying me about the plans for this event (even more than the amazing price I've paid for a platinum ticket and still had to pay extra for photos!) and I hope it's sorted out by the time October comes.

Not looking to stir trouble, just looking to save you unnecssary unfulfilled hope - you may have missed this post - "at present we have no plans to offer digital images of the photo shoots at DSTL"

Yep, I saw that, I'm just hoping that if there's enough call maybe they'll change their mind! :)

If not, thankfully I've got access to a pretty good scanner and I'm gonna make sure I take a decent digital camera with me for everything else!

[anam]

Pure digital are just awesomeeee! Here is a sample of an image in a certain convention/event where they provided BOTH printed and digital copies. The printed copy was printed and handed out immediately and the digital copy was available for download the next day. Anyone who appreciates quality will notice the difference from a regular scan.

Edited by anam, 04 June 2012 - 11:02 PM.

[Annick]

From my old idol, on the 3rd time we met, we received a digital photo without signature and one by post with signature. Worked fine for all the old fans.

But that situation I can not compare with this one (appr. 15 fans, a one day close event in the Netherlands)

[Rainbowchazer]

The way the half marathons I have completed work is that the photographer takes the shots as you're racing then, in around 10 days, you go to the website, type in your race number and get a choice of photos indexed as featuring your race number. You can then choose downloading a copy of any you like for a fee or getting a physical copy sent for a higher fee.

If the photoshoots were indexed by guest and maybe time, that would allow fans to choose in the same way, wouldn't it? No use if you want something signed on the day, but to me, that's what the standard shots are for. Perhaps with the multi-day cons it might be possible to have a faster system in place so that photos could be ordered and signed within the duration of the con? I know at San Diego Zoo they have a guest photo system where the shots are taken on the way to the bus tour and are ready by the time guests return from the tour around 90 minutes later, but I would imagine they have a bigger team working on that and it can employ a system which doesn't have to be portable like anything at a con would.

Just my thought. And for the record, I prefer the stock shots for the autos and a digital version for anything else, mainly because I am not photogenic, as you can see from my icon! Then I have the option of walking away rather than feeling obliged to buy something which shows the guest looking their usual cool self and me looking like a dork on speed.

[ElizaJay]

Digital for me as I just find it easier being able to copy/upload/download as required, email, etc.

[ElQuijote]

I would be okay with just digital copies....