[RoyalHighlander]

This test only has one question, but it's a very important one. By giving an
honest answer, you will discover where you stand morally. The test features
an unlikely, completely fictional situation in which you will have to make a
decision. Remember that your answer needs to be honest, yet spontaneous.
Please scroll down slowly and give due consideration to each line.



You are in Florida, Miami to be specific. There is chaos all around you
caused by a hurricane with severe flooding. This is a flood of biblical
proportions. You are a photojournalist working for a major newspaper, and
you're caught in the middle of this epic disaster. The situation is nearly
hopeless. You're trying to shoot career-making photos. There are houses and
people swirling around you, some disappearing under the water. Nature is
unleashing all of its destructive fury.



Suddenly you see a man floundering in the water. He is fighting for his
life, trying not to be taken down with the debris. You move closer...
somehow the man looks familiar. You suddenly realize who it is. It's George
W. Bush! At the same time you notice that the raging waters are about to
pull him under.



You have two options-you can save the life of G.W. Bush or you can shoot a
dramatic Pulitzer Prize winning photo, documenting the death of one of the
world's most powerful men.



So here's the question, and please give an honest answer :











Would you select high contrast color film, or would you go with the classic
simplicity of black and white?

[Richard]

Assuming the light was alright I would go with the colour film to accent the face colour against the background.

[Constantinople]

I'd save the human being from drowning.

[Streaker]

Colour film. It's better for journalistic purposes.

[Regina]

It's a trick question.......everyone uses digital these days. The question should be do you kick up the pixels so it's clearer when blown up.

[Blue_Nose]

Any photographer worth his salt would definately have to go with the 5-megapixel shot....

[ShepherdsDog]

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

Any photographer worth his salt would definately have to go with the 5-megapixel shot....

What are you using, a Flintstones' Camera???? Any photo journalist using anything under 8 MP deserves to be in the floodwaters too!! Also, if you're only using an SLR (film version) you'd use slide for better saturation. Click the shot throw in a kisby ring.

[figfarmer]

I never shoot anything over 2 MP unless I'm planning on making posters. I photograph people for album covers and such frequently and the fellow who actually creates the cover graphics bitches at me if I do.

I'd keep filming.

[PluggyRug]

Well... I was there and George stole my camera

[ROCKaMIC]

RoyalHighlander RoyalHighlander:

Would you select high contrast color film, or would you go with the classic
simplicity of black and white?

[rockymountainrider]

figfarmer figfarmer:

I never shoot anything over 2 MP unless I'm planning on making posters. I photograph people for album covers and such frequently and the fellow who actually creates the cover graphics bitches at me if I do.

I'd keep filming.

I use the 5MP for houses and material samples for renderings. It's easier to reduce the file size after the fact than drive and re-find your subject.

Take the picture.

[Scarecrow]

... I'd shoot it in colour. Then, I can just change it to black and white in Photoshop later.

[rockymountainrider]

or sepia or crackle, or stained glass or...

[Non-Rev]

Constantinople Constantinople:

I'd save the human being from drowning.

I'm with you - if it WAS a human being - not a paranoid megalomaniac. He said BUSH, not "human being".....

[spikedriver]

Why even take the camera lens cover off the lens. Nobody ould believe you anyway.