Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/02

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

Subject: [Leica] Web publishing
From: Jim Brick <>
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 20:56:12 -0800

You all should be warned against publishing hi-res photographs on the web.
They are up for grabs to anyone who wants them. Keep the resolution low
(find a fit between good looks and low resolution) to keep your copyrighted
original photograph out of the hands of thieves.


At 04:59 AM 2/3/99 +0100, you wrote:
>Andrew Nemeth wrote:
>> >It is also largely good enough for web publication.
>> No offense to Mr Ball, but why do people assume that the www
>> is some crap, lowest-possible-common-denominator-will-do medium?
>> Do people shoot on super-8 because it is 'only' for TV?  Do
>> people shoot stills onto miniDisc because it is 'only' for
>> advertising?
>> Garbage in/ garbage out.  If you want a high quality site then
>> you use high quality images.  And digital capture just doesn't
>> cut it in a cost-effective way.  Not yet.  ;^)
>Super-8 (film) is/was not crap. 
>Back to the point: high quality web publishing is achievable today
>through any of the 'megapixel' mid-range, consumer oriented digital
>still cameras. Try this:
>I insist that this is web publishing, not an alternative to print out
>high quality enlargements.
>For the rest, I agree with you. 
>I have no wish and no need to jump into the digital bandwagon today
>because of all the reasons that have been mentionned in this thread. The
>only disagreement in this discussion was about the time line needed to
>get to the point where digital will take over the 35mm SLR (and RF)
>marketplace. Jim says 50 years, I say less than 10. This has
>consequences on the way we plan investments today. I sure hope Leica
>will start giving clearer signals as to the evolution agenda for the M
>and R lines on the matter...