A few comments on various remarks about digital and silver imaging, LPs
versus CDs, etc.
I used to review hi-fi equipment. I'm no big fan of tube equipment, but
tubes DO have theoretical and practical advantages over transistors.
I've heard good and bad tube and good and bad transistor equipment.
People who think tube equipment is categorically superior to transistor
equipment (or vice-versa) are badly mistaken. (The preference for tube
guitar amps is largely due to the softer clipping of tube amplifiers.)
As for LP versus CD... I've made enough live recordings to know that,
generally speaking, digital recorders are more accurate than analog
recorders, and that CDs or tape recordings (especially open-reel)
usually sound more like the master tapes from which they are derived
than LPs do. (This is easily demonstrated by comparing an LP with the CD
derived from the same tape. I've done it.) The LP is not a bad recording
medium, but it's a terrible playback medium, and it needs expensive
technology to get really good sound out of it. (In fairness, I should
mention that the brief boom in direct-disk recording of 20 years ago
clearly showed the limitations of tape recorders of that era.)
As for film vesus digital imaging... Unless there is some incredible
breakthrough in the cost and resolution of CCD chips, silver imaging is
NOT going to disappear within the lifetime of anyone on this list -- and
that includes people who are now 20 years old and live to be 100. No one
has to worry that their expensive camera is suddenly going to be a
Lilliputian boat anchor because 35mm film is no longer available.
Silver imaging, as advanced as it is, is still (fortunately) not a
mature technology. My understanding is that there is still a lot of room
left for improving film speed and sharpness, which will further widen
the gap. And although you can't draw an exact parallel, I should remind
everyone that the high quality of 35mm photography has not exactly
killed off medium-format or view cameras.
The replacement of silver imaging by digital will not -- and cannot --
happen independently of market forces. IF it occurs, it will be only
because the majority of photographers feel digital imaging offers
advantages that justify completely abandoning silver imaging. That is
NOT likely to happen any time in the next 20 years. In fact, I don't
think it's likely to EVER happen. Digital will never be able to equal
the resolution of silver, and there will always be a market for the
highest-quality imaging current technology is capable of. (Of course, I
can't speculate about unknown future technology. But you _cannot_ assume
that because something can be imagined, it can necessarily be built.)
Price is also a major consideration. A $200 Olympus Stylus Zoom will
produce negatives that can withstand substantially greater enlargement
than any digital camera (including, I assume, the $10,000 SLRs).
Although the cost/picture of digital imaging is potentially cheaper than
that of silver imaging, the latter is so low these days that it's going
to be a while before the lower cost of digital becomes important.
Indeed, the majority of photographers are amateurs using cameras that
cost less than $200. They aren't about to switch to digital.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|