Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric wrote: . . . Second of all, you forgot a qualifier - ugly CHEAP slide prints. --> Cibachrome, I assume. Or a process mentioned here sometimes, out of reach for a lot of people, the name of which I forget right now. I was considering the "general public". For the "average joe", this is quite a departure from the "must have a print in hand" / show it off "Kodak Magic Moments" approach. Print films have come a long way and can match slides for sharpness and are superior in controlling contrast. But if you're going to project, or publish, your photos, slides are still a better choice for many reasons. --> We agree 100%, no problem. I just expect that this "pick from scans" approach could generate more business on the slide side of things. and enlargements notably, even if of the shoddy mega-store cheaper-than-thou variety. Definitely not meant to down-rate color print film and / or process. The more they enlarge, the more they'll want "the good stuff", Leica eventually to the lucky ones. --> MAGAZINES tend to be supports for advertising dollars. In audio, they very seldom direct people to the real best purchases, performance wise, from a connoisseur's point of view, in all price brackets. (Audio is where I have real expertise. I'm leaving photography to you for a more "definitive" quality of information.) So a PC magazine (what sells more than PC magazines these days?), voicing a "best of" opinion remains a PC magazine talking about photography, but SELLING photography to the widest audience now available this side of TV and FM marketing, an affluent audience able to afford a Digilux Zoom, for instance. YET, I sort of expect most consumer grade PC (and MAC) to be used more and more for "multimedia" purposes. We may be witnessing the re-birth of digital photography with a more palatable PURCHASE RATIONALE for the general public, as the Internet continues to grow. So, in this context, PC magazines may wind up with quite an increase of percentage of "multimedia" content, perhaps as on-line "pay per view" extensions, not so far away. To them, film-based photography is only a make-shift for digital (photography), their home base market. Perhaps do they expect film to go the way of vinyl LPs ... ? A narrow, vertical niche market ... Unlikely to get an established pro like you excited but very likely to provide quite an avenue for newcomers to photography, digital photography that is. [ I actually wonder how they're going to make their profits without the expensive consumables they are used to benefit from, day in, day out: film notably, in consumer markets. I still have to read about digital x-rays ... yes the Catscans and NMRs are digital media ... ] So, in the end, "real" photography may survive because PC magazines + technology + general availability (and acceptance --> read "excitement" ) of digital photography gets more people interested in the whole thing and those more demanding from the digital scene "convert" to "real" photography as their expectations and proficiency keep growing, eventually to become Leicaphiles, too, with a new generation of star photographers, brought up in "computer art", digital photography and such. Have you ever tried "remote viewing" the "new" Leicas, 10, 15, 20 years from now ? AJQ