If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2018 06:54:21 -0400, Scott Schuckert wrote in
040620180654218514Scott : In article , nospam wrote: meanwhile, billions of digital photos are taken every day and uploaded to various online services, nearly all of which with smartphones. more than one *trillion* photos were taken in 2017. Shall we talk Scotsmen? One could say the vast majority of cell phone images are what we used to call "snapshots" - images, true, but taken with no consideration of composition, and all the technical details left to automation. The smartphone pics are the equivalent to those that came out of the Pocket Instamatics, and some of them was rather good... https://www.lomography.com/magazine/...cameras-kodak- pocket-instamatic -- teleportation kills |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
In article , RJH wrote:
https://petapixel.com/2015/04/24/12-...ill-choose-to- sho ot-film-over-digital/ what a joke. that is a completely bogus article. every single point is *wrong*. Snip good points well made Film might have perceived advantages, even if they're difficult to express: * More care/time/thought might be taken over taking a shot because of the cost/time consequences (developing, loading etc) and limitations (fixed ISO, burst facilities etc); nothing prevents doing that with digital. just because someone *can* shoot thousands of photos in a single session doesn't mean they *must* do so. instead of a 64 gig or 128 gig card, use a 128 or 256 megabyte card, which can only hold maybe a dozen photos. set the camera to fully manual and do not chimp. not even for a test exposure. * Much as the analogue/digital discussions in audio, the quality is in the eye of the beholder - film is 'felt' to be better than digital. except that the quality of film is measurably *not* better. the 'film look' and 'the warmth of vinyl records' is distortion, which can be added back if desired, if one really wants the look of film or the sound of vinyl. Ironically, this is often to do with limitations of the medium. And no amount of measurement or argument is going to shift that perception. that's true. some people refuse to accept reality. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
In article , Scott Schuckert
wrote: meanwhile, billions of digital photos are taken every day and uploaded to various online services, nearly all of which with smartphones. more than one *trillion* photos were taken in 2017. Shall we talk Scotsmen? One could say the vast majority of cell phone images are what we used to call "snapshots" - images, true, but taken with no consideration of composition, and all the technical details left to automation. so what? the same happened with film. far more instamatics were used than slrs. there have been movies shot with iphones, some of which have won awards. you have a very distorted view of modern photography. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On 6/3/2018 11:02 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: My phone can take pictures? Son of a gun, so it can... Meanwhile, I just spent a couple of hundred bucks to have my Nikon F100 body tuned up. you're the lone exception. Another airline survey? city bus. i have posted an image of a professional NY photographer, who still uses film. that makes two. meanwhile, billions of digital photos are taken every day and uploaded to various online services, nearly all of which with smartphones. more than one *trillion* photos were taken in 2017. B&H Adorama Both of the above sell a lot of film cameras. nowhere near as many as they used to. go ask them how their film sales have dramatically dropped off in recent years. I wonder why a lot of professional photographers don't listen to you. they don't need to. they already are on the digital bandwagon. very, very few photographers are still shooting film and that number is shrinking rapidly. https://petapixel.com/2015/04/24/12-...-choose-to-sho ot-film-over-digital/ what a joke. that is a completely bogus article. every single point is *wrong*. #1. Film Photography Was Already Perfect nothing is perfect, however, film is a lot *less* perfect than digital. that also contradicts his other point, #11, 'for the imperfections'. either film is perfect or it's not. it can't be both. #2. Higher Dynamic Range absolutely false. #3: It Slows You Down nothing prevents shooting slowly with digital, and that's actually a drawback. it's nothing more than rationalizing what is a limitation. #4. The Pictures Are Permanent no they definitely aren't. film fades and/or can be damaged by moisture, mold, fire, physical damage (e.g., tears, stains), etc. digital does not deteriorate in any way and can easily last forever, much to the chagrin of the people in the photos. #5. The Chemicals Smell Oh So Good apparently the author has been inhaling a bit too much, and more than just photo chemicals. #6. You Don¹t Need Electricity good luck trying to print a photo or show a slide without electricity. good luck trying to take a photo without electricity. film cameras needed batteries to power the exposure meter, electronic flash (or flash bulbs), and winder/motor drive.* electricity is not exactly hard to find either. he's grasping. * selenium meters don't need batteries but they're difficult to find and not that accurate. magicube flash cubes don't need batteries, but good luck finding those either, plus they only work with instamatic style cameras, not an slr the author presumably would be using. #7. It ³Just Looks Better² no it definitely does not. digital has significantly higher resolution, dynamic range and colour accuracy than film. not only that, but digital gets *better* as technology improves. modern displays show a wider range and more accurate colours as well as a wider dynamic range than older displays did. today's raw converters, noise reduction and other image processing produces better results than in the past. nevertheless, for those who want the 'film look', the quality can be downgraded very easily. #8. A Digital Photograph is Just a Pixel Mosaic meaningless twaddle. a film photograph is just a bunch of grains. everything is just a bunch of molecules. #9. Film Cameras Are Inexpensive only because nobody wants them, with the exception of rare collectibles which are not purchased to be used. he's also neglecting the ongoing cost of film and processing, which quickly adds up the more photos that are taken. digital not only produces better results, but is cheaper to operate! #10. To Be DifferentÅ* A Talking Point one can be different while shooting digital. walk around with this: https://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2010/05/bleurrrgh.jpg https://www.wired.com/2010/05/rainbo...requires-sungl asses-to-use/ #11. For the Imperfections that contradicts #1, where he said film was perfect. nevertheless, the imperfections of film can be added to any digital image, assuming one wants them. #12. The Element of Surprise that is not unique to film cameras. Anticipated response, that predictability does not respond to my statement. The fact is that there still a lot of film users, and many who are purchasing new film cameras. THE ISSUE IS NOT WHETHER DIGITAL USERS OUTNUMBER FILM USERS, WE ARE NOT EVEN DISCUSSING WHETHER DIGITAL IS SUPERIOR TO FILM. That article simply indicates that there are a lot of film users out there. Whether the statements contained in it are right or wrong is irrelevant to the point. -- PeterN |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On 6/4/2018 6:51 AM, Mike Headon wrote:
snip And nobody has mentioned - it's fun! I use my four film cameras regularly (I broke theÂ* FT2 - at least I tried to fix it and made it worse). But I wouldn't be without the DSLR and smart phone. Fun, creativity, and personal preference, are irrelevant. Digital is better, and you are an idiot if you don't use digital. //end sarcasm tag. -- PeterN |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On 6/4/2018 6:54 AM, Scott Schuckert wrote:
In article , nospam wrote: meanwhile, billions of digital photos are taken every day and uploaded to various online services, nearly all of which with smartphones. more than one *trillion* photos were taken in 2017. Shall we talk Scotsmen? One could say the vast majority of cell phone images are what we used to call "snapshots" - images, true, but taken with no consideration of composition, and all the technical details left to automation. According to at least one person here, automation does a better job than any human. It should be noted that this same individual, also argues that automated cars are safer than human driven cars: But also argues that when necessary elements of care automation are implemented, humans can do it better. I take his undocumented opinions as being worth what we pay him for them. -- PeterN |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
In article , PeterN
wrote: According to at least one person here, automation does a better job than any human. It should be noted that this same individual, also argues that automated cars are safer than human driven cars: But also argues that when necessary elements of care automation are implemented, humans can do it better. I take his undocumented opinions as being worth what we pay him for them. that's a gross misrepresentation of what i've said. the fact that you resort to lying about it says a lot. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On 6/4/2018 11:07 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: According to at least one person here, automation does a better job than any human. It should be noted that this same individual, also argues that automated cars are safer than human driven cars: But also argues that when necessary elements of care automation are implemented, humans can do it better. I take his undocumented opinions as being worth what we pay him for them. that's a gross misrepresentation of what i've said. Not even worth answering. the fact that you resort to lying about it says a lot. Your asinine statement was that there are one or two who shoot film. That is the only issue. Your statement stating that is not true. When I showed that you are wrong, you typically resorted to a personal insult. I wonder whether you are taking lessons from Donald Trump, or whether he takes lessons from you. -- PeterN |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
In article , PeterN
wrote: According to at least one person here, automation does a better job than any human. It should be noted that this same individual, also argues that automated cars are safer than human driven cars: But also argues that when necessary elements of care automation are implemented, humans can do it better. I take his undocumented opinions as being worth what we pay him for them. that's a gross misrepresentation of what i've said. Not even worth answering. thereby admitting that's exactly what you did. the fact that you resort to lying about it says a lot. Your asinine statement was that there are one or two who shoot film. That is the only issue. Your statement stating that is not true. only an idiot would think that was to be taken literally. When I showed that you are wrong, you typically resorted to a personal insult. nope. it was *you* who resorted to insults, as usual. I wonder whether you are taking lessons from Donald Trump, or whether he takes lessons from you. clearly, he takes lessons from me. i told him to fire james comey, and he did. i told him to stop using film cameras, and he did. i told him to stop going to mcdonald's so much, but that one will take a bit more effort. he's not really into quinoa and tofu. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2018 21:13:25 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , PeterN wrote: According to at least one person here, automation does a better job than any human. It should be noted that this same individual, also argues that automated cars are safer than human driven cars: But also argues that when necessary elements of care automation are implemented, humans can do it better. I take his undocumented opinions as being worth what we pay him for them. that's a gross misrepresentation of what i've said. Not even worth answering. thereby admitting that's exactly what you did. the fact that you resort to lying about it says a lot. Your asinine statement was that there are one or two who shoot film. That is the only issue. Your statement stating that is not true. only an idiot would think that was to be taken literally. You frequently take things literally ... When I showed that you are wrong, you typically resorted to a personal insult. nope. it was *you* who resorted to insults, as usual. I wonder whether you are taking lessons from Donald Trump, or whether he takes lessons from you. clearly, he takes lessons from me. i told him to fire james comey, and he did. i told him to stop using film cameras, and he did. i told him to stop going to mcdonald's so much, but that one will take a bit more effort. he's not really into quinoa and tofu. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|