Re: Still taking photos

Mike B.
Holy Moly, that's the equivalent of 36 rolls at 36 exposures. For 20 saves? Of which maybe 5 are of calendar quality, if you're lucky. Wow, digital photography has really changed the art of taking pictures. I used to turn on the tripod mounted video recorder, step back a few paces, and start exposing 35mm film at a rate that I thought was probably wasteful, but what the heck, you're 1500 miles from home, might as well overdo it than miss the shot of a lifetime, before I had to pay attention to the video, and pan the train by and off into the sunset, Pack everything back into the car, and beat the train to the next spot. I neither, Mike, never learned where and when the exact right time to click the shutter to get the right shot that friends, relatives, and fellow photogs will vote for pic of the year. If it wasn't so much fun recording the events with our eyes and ears, the drugery of photography of things we love would be work. Just think of the guy that took the photo below, that once he clicked the shutter, he had to load everything up on his burro and treck a few miles to his model T and hope that it will start-up with less than a couple of hand cranks. Otto had to get the right shot the first time because he couldn't just hold the shutter button down until the memory card filled up, and the artistry of photography will never be replaced with the ability to hold the shutter button for extended lengths of time, and picking out the best 20. But what does that matter to us amatures who leave home on limited vacation time and just want to record the fun we had chasing trains that should have been put out to pasture 50 years ago, going home with the memories stored safely away on the memory card. We've come a very long way since Otto shot that K-28, Eh?