[Leica] Photogs in a Digitally Abreviated World

[joelct at singnet.com.sg (Joseph Low)]

            Well said Dante - ce'est la vie

            Joseph / Singapore

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+joelct=singnet.com.sg@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+joelct=singnet.com.sg@leica-users.org]On Behalf Of Dante
Stella
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 09:09
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Photogs in a Digitally Abreviated World

Let me offer a different perspective.  Archival life does not matter
while you are alive, because you can always make more prints.  Or scan
negs or whatever.  Nor does it matter after you die.

Let's start with the brutal truth.  No one will care about 99% of your
(anyone's) pictures when you are gone.  Some basic photos for your
family e via.  Look in every antique store that has a box of old family
photos for sale.  Bet the people in them were glad they spent a
princely sum of money on a photograph.  I have seen enough deaths in my
time to know that photographs are among the things that get weeded
through, if not pitched.  What good will your selenium-toned, acid-free
fiber-based prints be when your widow/er or survivors throw them out?
What about when they are banished to a basement or attic to be
discovered two generations later, and no one can make any sense of
them?

The events of your life live only in your memory.  Likewise, you only
leave a legacy in other people's memories. Although they might be of
some sentimental value to your family, your photographic works will
only live on through being great.  If your photographs are masterful,
incredible works of art, rest assured that people will take care of
them - and make use of them - long after you are gone.  When you see
him, ask Ansel Adams.  I would not be worried about negative life,
print life, anything.  People in the future will find a way to do what
they need to do to preserve the materials.  If your photographs are
mediocre, there's no need to worry at all.  They'll probably only
outlast you by a month.

Dante






On Dec 13, 2004, at 2:16 AM, Stephen Gandy wrote:

> a few years ago I bought a Canon S900
> at the time it was a best rated printer, and Canon claimed a print
> life of
> 25 years
>
> Canon  lied.
> prints were badly faded within 6 months indoors, with no exposure to
> sunlight, using Canon inks and the best Canon papers.
>
> it's easy to get excited about digital's ease
>
> it's also far to easy to forget about how long the digital image we
> worked
> so hard for will be around.
>
> digital prints aren't proven to last as long as silver, regardless of
> any
> claims made otherwise, cause digital prints and storage mediums ain't a
> hundred years old yet !
>
> buyers of art prints have a right to expect their investment to be
> protected not only during their lifetime, but during their survivor's
> lifetime as well.  anything less is unacceptable.
>
> but forget them. Photographers have the right to expect their work will
> last during our lifetime, and beyond for their families after they pass
> over.   real world, digital work may not do that at its present state
> of
> development.  sure, it will eventually happen, but that will be of
> little
> consequence to those who lose years of work, or even entire careers,
> due to
> digital degradation of prints and storage mediums.
>
> the only way I know of to really safeguard that valued digital print
> is to
> make a silver neg copy of the digital print.  in silver I trust the
> future,
> not digital.  someday maybe, but not now.  I am open to other
> solutions,
> but I won't believe unproved claims of  estimated life spans of digital
> prints and digital storage mediums.
>
> Stephen Gandy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
____________
Dante Stella
http://www.dantestella.com

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information