Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/03/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]How do you send your film pictures to the wire service immediately after you have shot them? On Friday, March 12, 2004, at 06:40 am, Sam wrote: > I respectfully reply "nonsense." > > Right off let's understand the words "need" and "desire" have > different meanings. There is nothing that can be done with digital > that cannot be done with film. No need was filled that had not been > filled before. None. I know from personal observation that the drift > from film to digital had nothing to do with need and everything to do > with fear. Fear that a competitor would find a way to use digital to > gain an advantage, or at least a perceived advantage. Methods of > working have changed not because of need but because of fear that > retaining the older work method would be thought old fashioned and > unhip. And somehow, someway, revenue would be lost because of it. The > only other influence I've seen in agencies are gadget lovers who pined > for new toys until they got them. I am not saying that digital is not > the wave of the near future. It is. But at the moment the choice to > use digital is one of whim, not of need. > > BTW, quality is not an issue. News images are used online or printed > coursely on paper. Whether the image is hi-rez or not will never be > noticed by the viewer. > > Sam S > > > Frank Dernie wrote: > >> ? a real need! Most news photographers find it fills a real need now. >> Most Sports photographers do as well. There are a few I know who >> still use film for ultimate quality but the difference in real world >> situations is very small between current digital and 35mm. The only >> people for whom film is still the best choice is the smallish number >> of fine art and landscape photographers using large and medium >> format. In studios even they are moving to (ludicrously expensive >> IMO) digital solutions. >> There are a small band of hobbyists who still use film - I am one of >> them - but many I talk to are only convinced by theoretical benefits >> of film over digital, they have never tried comparing for themselves. >> I know exactly under what circumstances I will use digital or film >> now, by my own experience and experiments. FWIW on my experiments the >> film is critical, on Kodachrome with a Leica and tripod there is >> clear superiority over DSLR results. Handheld the differences are >> smaller. Using 200 asa print film changes the results - digital is >> always better. >> For ultimate quality I still use medium format. I only use 35mm film >> for fun now. For hand held walking about type photography digital is >> as good and much more convenient. I wait with impatience for the >> digital rangefinder which takes my Leica lenses, then I will have the >> best of both worlds - a digital camera which is fun to use! >> Frank >> >> >> >> On Friday, March 12, 2004, at 12:52 am, Sam wrote: >> >>> A time will come when digital cameras will serve a real need, but >>> that time is not yet. I agree, 8 bits led to much greater, and >>> useful, computers. My point is that there is a space between >>> conception and realisation that is ripe for fad and novelty. We are >>> going through it now. Now really, does it make sense for people who >>> shoot 20 or 30 frames a week to talk about "work flow"??? >>> >>> Sam S >>> >>> >>> Dan C wrote: >>> >>>> The 8-bit home computers led directly to the multi giga-hertz 32 >>>> bit ( and >>>> soon to become 64 bit) home computers that we have today. Pac Man >>>> led to >>>> the incredably complex games available today, along with software >>>> such as >>>> Photoshop. They didn't lead back towards abacii or slide rules. >>>> Nor >>>> will film cameras make a comeback among the people who benefit from >>>> them >>>> (and this includes both pros and the happy snapper amateur). >>>> >>>> At 06:29 PM 11-03-04 -0500, Sam wrote: >>>> >>>>> No, I'm saying we are going through a period in which just about >>>>> everyone believes they need a digital camera, and if they had one >>>>> so many things would be done better. Even those people who are >>>>> forced to use digital because it's been imposed on them by bosses >>>>> are merely being compelled by the forces of whim. If getting more >>>>> pictures faster is important to a news outlet (for example), why >>>>> the hell is the news 85% nonessential garbage? Are there any signs >>>>> that digital has improved anything? None. To the vast majority >>>>> it's a novelty made to appear like a need. It's much like when the >>>>> first 8 bit home computers became available. How much serious work >>>>> was done on Atari 800s and Commodore 64s? Not much, but they were >>>>> made to sound as if your whole life would be dramatically changed. >>>>> Instead of dramatic change we got Pac Man. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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 >>> >> >> -- >> 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 > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html