Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 3/17/2010 12:56 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote: >> On 3/16/2010 4:40 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote: >> >>>> Perhaps of interest to those on the list whose images are wholly >>>> digital: >>>> >>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/books/16archive.html?ref=books >>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/books/16archive.html?ref=books&pagewanted >>>> =all> &pagewanted=all >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> I'm surprised this one slipped though the whole premise is fantasyland >>> cherished in academia but in the real world people know better. >>> I trust digital media far more than I do film or paper. >>> >>> " authors, are ultimately just a series of digits ? 0?s and 1?s ? >>> written on >>> floppy disks, CDs and hard drives, all of which degrade much faster than >>> old-fashioned acid-free paper. Even if those storage media do survive, >>> the >>> relentless march of technology can mean that the older equipment " >>> >>> [Rabs] >>> Mark William Rabiner >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >>> >> My typical print file now is around 120mb. That is just the size of the >> tif file opened from raw in a SLR. A scan of a 35mm slide is around >> 100mb. So I would say that floppy disks, CD's and DVD's are out of the >> equation, not that they are reliable anyway. (I wonder if the curator at >> the Houghton Library really just stopped at storing John Updike's 5 1/4" >> floppies in "climate controlled stacks".) Finding stuff is not that >> difficult, though if you have a lot of images you may have to draw a >> line in the sand and begin cataloging from that point forward, as I did. >> If reliability of the digital media, or the lack of a migration path, is >> really an issue, then business and scientific enterprises are in real >> trouble. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > We agree Ken. > It will be interesting to see how long this cherished prejudice by the > academic community and writers against digital is allowed to continue. > Its nuts. People love to read that stuff for some reason. > They think the weak points they get to attack without any backup is storage > and the evil "Photoshop". Its mindlessness. > They just need to feel that digital photography is some kind of scam and > not > "real" photography. > > [Rabs] > Mark William Rabiner > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information Yes, it is a never-ending argument. As has been noted many times before, probably someone long ago objected to dodging and burning. In my own darkroom, I have been guilty of unsharp masking, intensifying negatives or portions thereof, and yes, even adjusting highlights in the print with much reduced Farmers reducer and a paintbrush. That is even before I got to selenium or gold 231 toning.