Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/18

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: dry & wet darkroom :-()-:
From: David Binder <dbinder@sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 11:03:21 -0400
References: <200010180319.UAA13043@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>

I find the _transition_ to digital to be the most fascinating part.
Years ago, I had the good fortune to tour the Collingwood Ontario
shipyards (long gone). Their draftsmen drew the subtly curved steel hull
plates with ink pens after which a laser traced the hand drawn lines to
automatically guide the cutting torch. I couldn't believe the accuracy
with which these people drew! Afterward, whenever I'd look at the welded
seams of the hull of a ship, I'd think of those people at their drafting
tables, and the painstaking care with which they drew. Of course, now
that drawing is done on computer, such drawing accuracy is a cinch. And
when I look at the hull of a new ship, I imagine people staring at
computer screens. And just try selling a drafting table these days!

I expect the same with the tansition in photography. Cutting edge Cone
Piezography-like technology will eventually be on the desktop of
schoolchildren. And when looking at photographs(piezographs) of the
future, I expect that I will be imagining photographers recharging
batteries, and staring at computer screens .  All that will be left to
ponder is the decisive moment itself. That alone is what will separate
the men and women from the mice. And so I agree with you Johnny that
"all the rest is mayonnaise", but only in the context of the digital
medium that is now becoming available. Something gained, something lost.

- -David Binder (it's *only* the thought that counts)



> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:57:19 -0400
> From: Johnny Deadman <john@pinkheadedbug.com>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: dry & wet darkroom :-()-:
> Message-ID: <B61289CF.3D4E%john@pinkheadedbug.com>
> References:
> 
> on 17/10/00 9:33 pm, Martin Howard at howard.390@osu.edu wrote:
> 
> > Uniqueness of image *comes* from non-uniqueness of process, to some extent.
> > Image has to be seen holistically, or I could go out and photograph a friend
> > jumping over a puddle and sell it for as much as a new print of the Gare St.
> > Lazare negative.
> 
> yeah, try it, M
> 
> uniquness of image comes from pressing the shutter at the right time with
> the right thing in the frame and the exposure set right and the lens
> focussed where you want it and knowing how to make a print of it... in
> whatever medium you like
> 
> all the rest is mayonnaise
> 
> - --
> Johnny Deadman
> y