40daystogo: That's an outrageously high proportion of "keepers" from one 36-roll of Kodachrome. Shows the quality of Steve McCurry's ability to see -- although, I guess, using the last roll of Kodachrome might have heightened the sense of gravity before clicking the button.
Using a digital camera as a light meter/chimp device, wow! who wouldn't!, the ultimate light/ hindsight meter, sorry! supposedly only 30 shots left in the known universe, tick,tick,tick
tarnumf: So much about lenses sharpness, high ISO and bokeh - no, they don't really matter.
We are not happy unless we can see the micro detail, with virtually no noise, at an Iso of 64million(or soon will be). It disappoints that technology can be stealing the power to make us all better photographers. The film images, didn't have image stabilisation, didn't have variable iso, and didn't have the luxury of bracketing. They weren't taken into Lightroom, or Photoshop, or had there contrast, colour or range played with, to the point where they look nothing like what was shot on the day. The "chromes" were filled with additional light to help exposure, framed well, developed and stuck on a digital scanner and converted. To sum it up, the camera was put on a tripod, metered, previewed (albeit) digitally and processed. We have come so far with digital photography, but the urgency to get it right up front, has been diluted to the point where it is, I feel, making us less capable to get the best out of photographic skills and slaves to fixing everything in post.