On 11/02/2011 10:19 AM, scott wrote:
>> I know a few people who have probably ended up spending something like
>> that over the course of the ten or twenty years they've been doing a
>> hobby, sure.
>
> Didn't you used to hang out with some gamers, surely they'd all spent in
> excess of $1000 on their PCs?

Hmm, plausibly yes. (Especially Wev. Then again, he somehow drives a 
BWM, and he makes it his mission in life to have a better PC than anyone 
else in the group...)

> Also nobody at your work who is
> interesting in cars and has spend more than $1000 on a car in one go?

Cars and houses are probably the only things I can think of that most 
people have and cost significantly more than that, yes.

> I
> find it hard to believe nobody at your work owns a dSLR, which surely
> cost around $1000 to spend in one go. Spending that sort of money on a
> hobby is more common than you think.

No, I'm fairly sure none of the 26 people who work here own a DSLR. 
(Obviously I haven't gone and *asked* them all individually, but nobody 
seems that interested in photography.)

>> Generally if
>> an image looks reasonable on a regular screen, it looks reasonable in
>> print too. Unless it's crucial for your images to look "perfect",
>
> Did you ever try actually comparing printed colours to your monitor
> using cheap consumer equipment? I don't think anyone would call that a
> "reasonable" match.

When I print photos out, it usually looks approximately as poor as it 
did on screen, yes.

> I think you'd be surprised what level of work goes into making even a
> low circulation full-colour magazine.

OK. As I say, I don't work in the print business personally. It just 
surprises me that anyone would shell out such a huge amount of money for 
something unless it was absolutely critical to have it.

Post a reply to this message