I guess Limited Visiblity is the term. India is a great country, but unfortunately it is a dirty country as well. How do you seperate the beauty from the dirty? Well, you need digital cameras to do that. You could do it with the antiquated film cameras too, but since you cant really process them digitally with ease, I guess it is not a good alternative to the digital cameras that we have on the markets today.
The popular Japanese companies that have been making cameras for ages were making them for Film cameras. And they have been making films too. When the world became digital, people thought that these companies would go out of business and that only companies that specialize in electronics would make good cameras. Well there are Panasonic and Sony cameras, but even today in the world of digital cameras Nikon rules.
They know how to make lenses. And when taking a photograph, it is the lens that matters, and makes sure that you get a good picture and the part played by the film or the digital CCD is quite low. Ofcourse it is important, but anyone with a bit of technology can make a good CCD and Nikon should be stuffed with money that it will not really have a problem to set up its own R&D to develop a good CCD for its cameras. Nikon still rules the world, and the box camera people will never realize it.
Untill about 10 years ago, Compact Flashes for cameras usually meant the lighting device that flashes and produces an enormous amount of light for a period that is less than a second to help the film cameras expose properly and capture good pictures. But today in the age of Digital cameras, where people have completely stopped buying rolls of films to expose them and get them developed at dark rooms and printed on photo papers and are using digital cameras instead where there is no use for the silver bromide chemical at all, use the term compact flash when they want to refer to the flash memory stick which would store the digital photos. Times have changed a lot. I wonder if someone invents a time machine and goes back in time would ever be able to adopt himself to the past.
I am told by many people that the camera is an extension of your eye, and the photograph shows how you look at things. If your photograph doesnt look good, it means either your camera has still not become an extension of your eye, or that you dont look at things properly.
I have been quite a good photographer for quite some time now. Have had a passion for (film) cameras from a very little age, and have wasted a considerable amount of money on 35mm and 120 mm films and their prints. I started off with a stupid Kodak box camera with built in flash, and slowly moved on to a Zenit SLR 35mm camera that I had bought 2nd hand for Rs 3000 odd, with a 50mm lens (fungus came free with it), and after a few months went for a Vivitar SLR with 20 – 70 mm zoom lens which iwas using for over 3 years and would have exposed atleast a thousand rolls of film on it, and all the photos have turned out very well. I still store those photos in a cardboard box, and I open it occassionally to drop 1 or 2 naphthalene balls in it. Dont have much time to scan them all n put them on picassa or something.
Right now, i dont want to go for a stupid digital megapixel camera for 10 or 20 k, i wish to go for a good Cannon or Nikkon SLR with a good assortment of lens ranging from 20mm to 400 mm, which is something I cannot afford as of now.
Below is a pic that i shot at Cassablanca, where a fashion show took place. These pics are not of the models who participated. I was using a friend’s Canon camera, just trying to test the lens, was quite some time after i handled a camera, so focussed on 2 girls standing on the other site of the hall and snapped the shutter.
I liked the picture. Beautiful lighting, beautiful expressions, though the girls r a bit ugly.
Am not very good with videography though. Check out a few videos that i shot with my N90