I still prefer film, though it is obviously more expensive, takes up too
much room, & can be a pain to find what you want. (After 25 years, anyway
;) ) The immediacy of digital has it's uses, but I suspect most of us don't
need it too often. But where film does score is longevity. Who knows what
medium will be around in 10 years time? Also the format, will Photoshop 26
still read today's files? At least slides & negatives can be scanned, I
could print out a 10" x 8" glass negative, if I had any! Seriously though,
Digital makes it easy to print photographs from 100 years ago or more, taken
on film that is now obsolete. The industry MUST make sure we'll be able to
print today's digital photographs in 3002.
Also, people should seriously think before pressing the button to delete
"bad" shots. Today's snaps become tommorow's family heirlooms, and all too
quickly. Shots of towns & cities, even landscapes change, we have some sort
of duty to preserve the present for our successors.
***Original Messages***
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 06:35:03 -0600
From: Steve Dropkin <steve@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] Digital camera downfalls -slightly OT
>We had this discussion a long time ago on the archival time span of
>various storage methods. B&W, Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Floppy Disks,
>and CDs. Now we can add DVD. Each change seems to result in a
>storage medium that has an archival time span that is shorter than
>before. Maybe the storage life is fine, but the method of viewing
>may be gone. (Remember the 8 track?)
Talk about a medium with a short lifespan!
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 13:46:40 +0000
From: Chris Barker <imagopus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [OM] Re: Digital v real photography - slightly OT and long
Just my thoughts Sam: I have loads of old photos, with negs, that I
"should" have thrown away.
I love the whole process required of wet film photography, and the
wait is part of the (perverse perhaps) enjoyment. Digital is too
much like a toy for those who don't *need* the immediate shots in my
personal view - obviously sports journalists, inter alia, benefit
from the immediacy of digital and it is probably essential for a
daily journo's salary...
Chris
- --
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, England.
Andy Gilbert
Exeter
Devon
England
< 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 >
|