Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/03/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] enough with Olympus DSLR postings PLEASE
From: kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour)
Date: Thu Mar 23 17:47:02 2006
References: <C04822AF.E520%bdcolen@comcast.net> <442302FB.5090008@waltjohnson.com> <DF992BF8-BA3A-4ED7-9C12-54FD79EA3B54@cox.net> <442330FE.70304@waltjohnson.com>

On Mar 23, 2006, at 4:36 PM, Walt Johnson wrote:

> Now Steve,
>
> If you look closely you'll see I've massaged  nothing here but  
> rather avoided the whole digital issue. The Capa thing, though, was  
> not only massaged but stomped to death. My part in that little tete  
> a tete would have had my nose against the blackboard were I a B.D.  
> student. Fortunately, being quite past that age, and stage, made  
> it  possible for me to attempt  enlightening the enlightened..  
> Initially, I thought failure was not an option. Not only do I pride  
> myself in having an innate persistence, I can be as big a  
> blabbermouth as any one on the LUG (almost ;-) )
>
> Nonetheless I did fail! Bested and busted and off to lick my  
> wounds. There will, (*/hear me Great Zeus/*) be another day. Until  
> that time I busy myself more productively. Cleaning lenses,  
> checking shutter speeds, emptying my colostomy bag. Tomorrow,  
> tomorrow, tomorrow. My spirit is dimmed but not gone. I shall 
> (Macarthuresquely) return.

that part about emptying your colostomy bag rang a bell...so thanks  
for reminding

me.

Maybe Brian should declare periodic timeouts for that purpose.

:-)

Steve




>
> Walt
>
>
>
> Steve Barbour wrote:
>
>> hey BD and Walt...really ?  .....
>>
>> what is at stake here; why are folks getting their shorts in a knot?
>>
>> I fail to understand why people get off on massaging this subject  
>> to  death, instead of doing something productive...anything...
>>
>> seems the future will take care of itself...without the slightest   
>> impact caused by the most sincere deliberations here.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On Mar 23, 2006, at 1:20 PM, Walt Johnson wrote:
>>
>>> B.D.
>>>
>>> I'm going to avoid this discussion but would make one comment.  
>>> It's  rewarding to know I'm not the only one who makes you so  
>>> damn  irascible.
>>>
>>> Walt
>>>
>>> B. D. Colen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh please, Peter. Get a grip. Whether or not this technology  
>>>> will  morph into
>>>> another, even better capture technology, film is now the  
>>>> 'former'  technology
>>>> - even if some prefer to keep using it - and it's been evident  
>>>> for  at least
>>>> a decade to anyone with open eyes that it was going to become   
>>>> 'former.'
>>>>
>>>> As to current cameras having a six month shelf-life, saying  
>>>> that  is about as
>>>> silly as saying that film is going to come back and supplant   
>>>> digital as the
>>>> dominant technology. Today's digital cameras only have a six month
>>>> shelf-life for those people who are far more interested in  
>>>> having  others see
>>>> what's hanging around their neck than they are in what they do   
>>>> with that
>>>> object. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/23/06 9:50 AM, "Peter Dzwig" <pdzwig@summaventures.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> B.D.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have been trying to stay out of this but...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't blame 'digital' for the death of photography,
>>>>>>
>>>>> Photography won't die, not while there are good photographers   
>>>>> around -
>>>>> including LUGers.
>>>>>
>>>>> blame those companies
>>>>>
>>>>>> and practitioners who insisted that digital was some weird  
>>>>>> and  amusing
>>>>>> passing fad (something you could regularly read on this list,   
>>>>>> certainly
>>>>>> within the last 18 months.)
>>>>>>
>>>>> As to "fad", we know that no digicam has a shelf life of more   
>>>>> than 6 months
>>>>> including Digital Ms. The question that we have to answer is   
>>>>> whether or not
>>>>> there is another technology around the corner; we simply don't   
>>>>> know, it may
>>>>> well be a fad in that sense. Remember video cassettes and  
>>>>> digital  video cameras
>>>>> and reel-to-reel...
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter Dzwig
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more  
>>>>> information
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more  
>>>> information
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


In reply to: Message from bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] enough with Olympus DSLR postings PLEASE)
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] enough with Olympus DSLR postings PLEASE)
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] enough with Olympus DSLR postings PLEASE)
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] enough with Olympus DSLR postings PLEASE)