Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/06/20

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Film is Archival
From: "Jim McIntyre" <>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:23:20 -0400
References: <> <141c01c336f4$0c1c7ea0$31e47d80@KRIEGERLPT>

The same kind of point can be made about letter-writing in the digital age.
If anyone has seen the wonderful Civil War documentary series and heard the
exerpts from letters, think about today's society with email. Will the same
kind of personal, intimate recording be available to someone documenting the
Gulf War? There will be far more visual images available from the "imbedded"
photographers, but will we have the unique personal insights of the
individual on the field? My mother used to write, once a month, long letters
to our relatives. Now she fires off a quick email now and then with an
"update". I tend to keep my emails, but I have a box of letters from my wife
from when we spent summers apart...20 years ago! I wonder if I will have my
Outlook inbox 20 years from now.

One of the pitfalls of using digital for more serious shooting is it takes
some of the discipline away. I guess that's the double-edged can
shoot without worry of cost, and edit as needed. But the compusion to shoot
first, shoot often can interfere with the "what am I really looking for"
approach. I have a PS digital, and only use it for the quick snap to email
grandparents. At the same time, I will shoot film for the "archival"
purpose. When I shoot with the film camera, I will take more time to
compose, to make sure that the shots will count.

As an additional 0.02: are not most news photogs shooting C-41, and leaving
it to production and editioral folks to render colour or B&W? If so, why are
there so many choices still in the market for excellent B&W film?

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Krieger" <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:20 AM
Subject: [Leica] Film is Archival

> Whatever else, at least at the present, film is the archival medium. You
> cannot put your CD or DVD away for 75 years, not tend to it much, and
> that it will be easy to use at that time. Standards will change, get much
> much better, and legacy equipment is likely to become scarcer. Film and
> prints sit there in the cool, dry, dark and don't do much. For my
> which is developing an archive of images, film (Kodachrome) is still the
> preferred way.
> I realize this may be a small minority concern.
> Most people want snapshots or pictures for newspapers, etc.  They are
> concerned about the future, to be sure, but that is not their main
> By the way, much the same argument applies to books vs. e-Books etc. Books
> just sit there, especially if the paper is not too reactive. Copying was
> means of preservation a long time ago, but when the monks get busy with
> other things...
> And if we want to have pictures available 500 years from now (think
> Renaissance), the medium might well be oil paint on canvas, printed books,
> or a ceramic image.
> MK
> --
> To unsubscribe, see

- --
To unsubscribe, see

In reply to: Message from Martin Krieger <> ([Leica] Film is Archival)