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: RE: Vs: [Leica] Digital vs Film
From: William Gower <w_gower@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 20:42:54 -0500

I've been thinking a lot about digital and film since returning from a 
trip a week ago. I'm not anti-digital, in fact I have a digital set-up 
at home including "archival" inks for black and white printing, but this 
experience hit home and I thought I'd share. (Plus, after searching this 
city high and low for some Microdol-X, I find out Kodak discontinued it 
a few months ago and I'm really pissed off.)

About a week ago I returned from visiting my Grandmother, who is 91 
years old and my last remaining grandparent. Her time on this earth is 
numbered, so it was important to take the time to visit with her.  The 
one thing she wanted to do the most was to visit the "old house" - the 
original home where she lived with my grandfather (who died in 1996) 
prior to moving into a seniors apartment a decade ago. So we went.

The house is slowly falling apart - not surprising that it's gone 
through 10 winters of -30c and 10 summers of +30c all boarded up. No 
heat, no running water, no humidity control, nada. The paint is peeling 
off the walls, mould and mildew is rampant, the linoleum is cracking and 
pealing. You get the picture.

What I didn't expect to find however, was the boxes of old photographs. 
4 large boxes FULL of old pictures.

And I mean old. The earliest one is dated 1903, but there are others 
that are, by estimation and judging by the ages of the people, at least 
circa 1890's. These are pictures of not only my father and grandfather 
and my great-grandfather, but my great-great-grandfather. Some were 
formal portraits, but the majority were informal shots. Dogs, men 
working teams of horses, my grandfather and great-grandfather harvesting 
wheat. My great uncle returning by ship from WW1.

I was astounded and asked my grandmother why on earth they would have 
left these photos to rot. Her reply was that the "important" ones were 
in albums. Which is true, to a point. All the formal pictures are tucked 
away in albums, while the majority of the informal/candid ones were left 
behind, without a thought to how important they actually are.

The pictures are, for the most part, in rough shape. Some are faded 
simply because they are over 100 years old, others have mildew damage - 
none are pristine, but all are still viewable.

Where am I going with this ?

Are your great-great grandchildren going to be holding one of your 
digital inkjet prints 100 years from now just because Epson or someone 
like Henry Wilhelm says you should experience no significant fading 
under proper storage conditions ?

Do you expect that electronic manufacturers will continue to build 
technology to support the CD and DVD formats 50 years from now, or are 
they going to be the technological equivalent of the 8 track tape, 45 
RPM disk or wax cylinder recording ?

Digital may be more efficient  = more images. I'm thinking now that 
digital = the potential for more images lost.

My thoughts. I guess only time will tell.

William





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

Replies: Reply from "\(SonC\) Sonny Carter" <sonc@sonc.com> (Re: Vs: [Leica] Digital vs Film)
Reply from "Mike Durling" <durling@widomaker.com> (Re: Vs: [Leica] Digital vs Film)