Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/30

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Digital is not photography (was long - shorter but still off topic)
From: Austin Franklin <austin@darkroom.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:03:22 -0500

> The CD has yet to replace the LP completely, as it was supposed to.

Well, try to buy any current music on an LP....  LPs are not dead, but they 
certainly are a very very very small percent of available music today.

>  As much as we
> would like it (digital) to be, and as excellent as it may be, the process 
is not, nor
> can it be, perfect.

Nor is any analog process.

> I have yet to confuse a live performance with a recording
> or an oil painting with a photograph, and I would wager that most if not 
all
> of us would say the same.

A lot of photography will certainly go all digital, but that does not mean 
that ALL photography will, and that it won't be, as charcoal drawings are, 
still a form of hobby and/or art.

>  The bottom line is that compact discs are in fact *not* music.
>  As we all know, they are pieces of plastic.

As well as LPs are nothing but pieces of phenylic resin...and I believe 
even Bakelite at one time....  But images, whether analog or digital, are 
just images...

One thing that separates recorded music from recorded images, is recorded 
images are 'presented', or 'interpreted', where recorded music is supposed 
to be as original accurate as possible.  A photograph can be taken and 
printed in many many ways, as well as a painting can be painted many many 
ways...  I believe there is far more 'artistic license' in photography than 
there is in recording music, and I've done both...I know there are some 
golden ear sound engineers who would differ...