AWOL Photos by Nadine?

I'm supplying a follow-up to my own posting.

This RMR site works wonders. Within a couple hours of posting my question I got an email reply from Nadine Kinney. She said, in part:

"I would like to offer an explaination ... I went to 3 major launches in the Fall, (Balls, XPRS and Plaster Blaster), one right after another. It was too much on my plate... I am also working on the LDRS article/photos, for the HPR magazine, and getting the prints done for that as well. I'm sorry for your frustration, and hope that this explaination makes sense to you, and you can understand." "I have all of the Balls prints done, and only 4 orders left from XPRS. I have 1/2 of Plaster Blaster done, and will be finishing that one up this weekend, so all the prints should be completed and mailed on Monday/Tuesday at the latest. Again, I'm sorry..."

I'm satisfied with Nadine's explaination -- especially if I get my prints next week. I hope that this answers the questions for others in the same boat.

David Marshall NAR 79812

Unless Nadine is producing the photos herself, I don't see how it can take so long to get reprints/enlargements made and shipped.

She manages to get proofs printed and at the launch site by the next day, even if the launch site is four hours round trip from the photo processer.

There have been occasions when I've thought about buying a photo, but I just can't justify $12 for one photo. I realize she has a fair amount of overhead, but still. She might sell a higher percentage of the photos with a little lower prices.

Brian Elfert

I don't know why she would waste her effort sending anything to HPR Magazine. I'd say HPR has about 20 subscribers due to Bruce Kelly's mismanagement. Unlike Nadiner, they do nor respond to emails and only publish on a schedule dictated by the work revolving around Bruce Kelly's sorry ass.

Phil Ste>> Anyone know the status of prints ordered from Photos by Nadine? >

There's a big difference between proofs & actual prints. A proof is taken directly from the negatives, and no effort is made to correct color, contrast, etc.

When you pay for a print from a professional, you can expect them to spend some time and effort trying to get as good of a print as possible from that negative. The proofs, on the other hand, are typically just spit out by a machine.

Compared to what I've seen other professional photographers charge, she's pretty darned reasonable.

And a lot of fun to BS with at a launch, too...

-Kevin

I think it was Ansel Adams who once, comparing photography to music, said "The negative is the score. The print is the performance."

-dave w

True, but now days, the negative is a RAW uncompressed file and the optimal print come from a couple minutes with Photoshop and then uploading to a professional digital lab. Or at least it should :)

- Marc Klinger Photography

Is Nadine using a digital process, or does she work with film & paper? (I'm not familiar with her stuff.)

-dave w

Film and paper last I saw (last LDRS in Orangeburg). She does awesome work.

That doesn't sound like much to me. 8x10's aren't cheap even if you don't include the value of a professional photographer.

Which has lead to the mistaken belief that anyone with a digicam and computer can produce professional level photos.

Same with graphic design... once it became possible to do it all on the computer, a lot of folks got the idea that they need not hire professionals to create ads, etc.

Tools can't replace talent.

Excellent, Ray!

-- Bruce Kirchner TRA L2 #5888 Michigan Team 1 High Power Rocketry Proud Gun Owner!

An EXCELLENT point. In fact the opposite is true. A talented photographer can take surprisingly good photographs with a very crude camera. Your aerial photos are a good example of this.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!