[Leica] Hot news! There is life in film yet.

[richard at imagecraft.com (Richard Man)]

Younger people generally don't print for two very simple reasons

First, even a budget photo printer - which of course we know is thousand
times better and cheaper than what most amateurs can get either by doing
their darkroom prints or commercial Kodak prints in the old days - is
expensive. A Holga is $30, but they need to buy and process film, and then
may be a scanner.

Even they use digital, the cost factor of a printer still is there.

Second, there is no benefit for them to print. Oh, I love prints myself -
but this demographic is much happier with web pics. Yes, I know this is your
criticism, but you know something? With the current technology, if it looks
good on the screen, and if there are enough "bits" in the file (and film is
35mm or even medium format), then someone can make it look good coming out
an inkjet printer, so there's nothing they need to prove.

Heck, in some Portfolio Review, a small number of people are starting to use
their iPad to show their work. Of course they better do their research and
know that it is OK with a particular reviewer, but it's the start of a
trend.


On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> 
wrote:

> I'm not all that hung up on darkroom prints.
> I'm fine with inkjets.
> I think if they scanned their negs and had s short stack of inkjets I'd be
> real impressed with their choice of scans instead of captures and not be
> inclined to argue with them. If their photographs were good.
> Any argument on choice of tools is irreverent if both people bring prints
> to
> the table.  As that's only thing which matters is the results. Not how they
> got there.
>
>
> Mark
>
>

-- 
// richard <http://www.imagecraft.com/>
// icc blog: <http://imagecraft.com/blog/>
// richard's personal photo blog: <http://www.5pmlight.com>
[ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous
replies in your msgs. ]