RE: [Leica] squabbling over digitial vs. film

["bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

First off, there are indeed collectors buying digital prints. And second
off, if AA offered them, people would immediately think that they were
"IT" and would from that moment on always demand digital prints...;-)

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of
Afterswift@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 1:59 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] squabbling over digitial vs. film


In a message dated 8/7/03 10:44:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
bdcolen@earthlink.net writes:

> I doubt very much at AA would be shooting digital at this point, other

> than to experiment. I have absolutely no doubt, however, that he would

> have long-ago abandoned the wet darkroom in favor of scanning his  
> negatives and doing is darkroom work in Photoshop, where he would have

> far more control over his image output than can be obtained in the wet

> darkroom. I also have no doubt that there would be an extremely 
> popular,  successful, and stunningly effective line of Ansel Adams 
> Photoshop  plug-ins. :-)
>  
>  B. D.
- --------------------------------
BD,

If there's anything I know about Adams, it's that he was
commercially-minded 
as well as quality oriented. Even now The New York Times sells only
freshly 
printed B&W silver pictures for $195 each from their archives. No
collector at 
the turn of the 21st century in his right mind will buy digital prints.
Adams, 
well aware of that fact and who is customers are, would not play games
with 
the market. He would be producing his traditional prints and getting
very 
well-paid for them. He was conscious of the bottom line.  

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

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