[Leica] digital and/or analog recording

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>]

We are in fact rehearsing the debate from around 1900, when painters 
and photographers were discussing the relative merits of the medium. 
Then and now we had strong proponents of the new technology, dazzled 
by the bright prospects and possibilities and the staunch defenders 
of the old technology. With hindsight we know both were right and 
wrong at the same time. Painting not only survived but thrived and 
arguably the best art was produced when painters no longer worried 
about photography but developed their own craft.
Many members of this list are acquainted with digital technology and 
computers and digital image processing and digital artwork. This 
acquaintance with modern technology or new media technology does not 
make a person better equipped to discuss these matters or make better 
predictions of the future. As the Economist once documented: most 
predictions of the last 25 years about  future technology were wrong 
or grossly inaccurate.  So beware of persons who predict anything 
with a strong voice and an empty body of facts.
Cameras are just tools, be it an F5 or M6 or a digital D1. I find it 
quite rash to state that anyone who uses the M6 as a photographic 
tool is blind for the future or that we should discuss the 
digital-analog area as a simple dichotomy as left-right in politics 
or backwards-enlightened when facing the future. The trend of the day 
is to go the digital route and I am convinced that one day many 
images will be made and stored by fully digital means. The Economist 
again noted a remarkable long term trend. It takes 50 years for an 
innovation to reach 50% of the population. Digital photography  has 
been around since 1980. So around 2030 about 50% of the image makers 
will do so by fully electronic/digital means. That leaves 50% of the 
image producers (aka photographers) to use analog techniques or a mix 
of both.
The current Porsche 911 is not a radically different car from the one 
from 1965. So the current M6 and its successors will be fully 
adequate for many tasks. I find it remarkable that we are inclined to 
discuss these important themes with an either/or approach.  The 
chemical process will be with us for a long time because it has a set 
of characteristics and advantages different from the digital process 
which also has its own set of advantages. If you are a 
slide/projection type of photographer or a B&W large-print maker, you 
are well served by the chemical tools.
Using these tools is in no way a backward position as one can 
acknowledge the use of digital image processing at the same time and 
even use both technologies together. I can see and appreciate the 
vast possibilities of digital photography, without jumping on the 
bandwagon and saying that from now on the Leica M  is obsolete or 
that users of the M or R (for that matter) are not seeing the light 
of the future. So instead of useless discussions and diatribes, we 
should concentrate on the strong points of either medium, assess what 
we like or need to use and act accordingly. And yes I have a digital 
camera, Photoshop on my Apple and scanners and printers to get any 
digitally produced output I like. I even give Photoshop classes at 
the regional art schools. And I still use my M and R and do not feel 
that there is room for both for the foreseeable future. When doing 
Photoshop I even see more possibilities for my M and when using the M 
I am expanding my views on Photoshop and the digital world. 
Co-existence of real scientific understanding and artistic views  of 
both media would help clear the fog.

Erwin