Re: High speed camera vs. HD video

"AKA gray asphalt" <benvhoff@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:NvxOj.2266$F23.1620@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Ken Hart" <kwhart1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:l4vOj.2267$WU.1750@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> "AKA gray asphalt" <benvhoff@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>> news:xXsOj.167785$nr1.119043@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> "Burgerman" <burgerman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>> news:uuaOj.50167$Ff4.16383@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> snip
>>>>
>>>> Yes. Its a point and shoot! Noisy, low image quality, does not
compare 
>>>> to a real Digital SLR. Great for snaps. Unusable for printing high 
>>>> quality 20x30 prints unless you are very easily pleased!
>>>
>>> That's not what the reviews say. You obviously
>>> haven't used one. They haven't even been
>>> available until last week in the US. So I know you
>>> are bsing. Who wants 20x30 prints for wedding
>>> photos?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Not many of my past wedding customers wanted 2030 wall prints, except
for 
>> the really upscale ones, but a 16x20, matted and framed of the bride
and 
>> groom was purchased about 90% of the time. In many cases, three were 
>> purchased (I gave a discount for that), one for the couple and one for 
>> each parent. I suspect tht I would have solf far fewer of them if I 
>> hadn't been shooting 6x7 negatives.
>
> I imagine that there are quite a few 16 x 20s requested but
> that is a little more than half the size of the 20 x 30. You may
> be right about the large format negs but there is a huge market,
> at least in my city for people who might not even have photos
> at the price that most 'wedding photo pros' charge. It's the
> memory and not the high resolution, perfectly posed and
> somewhat typical and unremarkable prints that I see, that is
> important.




16x20 may be half the size but its still much bigger than you would want
to 
print from a noisy point and shoot with its tiny sensor and lens and 
massively too big for a single frame from an HD camera.  Garbage in
garbage 
out applies to photographs as much as computers and hi-fi.

The Hi-Fi one is a good example. Spend all your money on the source in the

past like a good turntable and cartridge and less on amp and speakers
always 
resulted in a better sound than a cheap turntable with some hugely
expensive 
amplifier and speakers.  Amplifying the bad scource doesent help.