Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/04/27

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

Subject: [Leica] Digital vs Film
From: Afterswift@aol.com
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 18:43:04 EDT

In a message dated 4/27/02 3:16:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us writes:

For me digital replaces 35mm 
color neg film only and focal lengths of 35 and wide
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -
Digital can't replace color negative film because diigital has no negative. 

To me digital is a replacement for Polaroid instant stocks and the role 
Polaroid played for almost 50 years. I believe Polaroid as a single company 
is no longer in business. I still hope that Polaroid films will be available 
at popular prices -- even in the face of digital because most Polaroid films 
require no equipment other than the original camera for immediate prints. And 
the P/N films produced high quality negatives. I certainly hope that some 
enterprising outfit will market 3x4 pack films.
They were splendid.  

I think digital cameras are invaluable for photojournalism, ad studio, and 
similar work.
However, based on my own experience, the general consumer and art 
photographer will stay with film. Which explains why most of my relatives 
leave their expensive digital cameras in the drawer and prefer to use their 
reliable point and shoot zoom 35s. They like the user simplicity of film 
cameras and the low cost of prints. 

br  
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html