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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
I heard on the local news, last night, that Canon is going to discontinue its final film camera (a 35mm model). Yet another nail in films's coffin? John --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
In article ,
RichA wrote: I heard on the local news, last night, that Canon is going to discontinue its final film camera (a 35mm model). Yet another nail in films's coffin? It was an expensive pro camera so no, film won't die on it's account. it's already dead. But Leica junked the M7, Voigtlander dumped a couple. However, there are 100 million old working film cameras out there. nearly all of which are not used. they sit on a shelf, while their owners use smartphones to take photos. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
In article , nospam
wrote: In article , RichA wrote: I heard on the local news, last night, that Canon is going to discontinue its final film camera (a 35mm model). Yet another nail in films's coffin? It was an expensive pro camera so no, film won't die on it's account. it's already dead. But Leica junked the M7, Voigtlander dumped a couple. However, there are 100 million old working film cameras out there. nearly all of which are not used. they sit on a shelf, while their owners use smartphones to take photos. 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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
In article , Scott Schuckert
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. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On 6/3/2018 8:03 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Scott Schuckert 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? i have posted an image of a professional NY photographer, who still uses film. B&H https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/browse/Film-Cameras/ci/9812/N/4288586278 Adorama https://www.adorama.com/c/Cameras/Specialty-Cameras/Film-Cameras Both of the above sell a lot of film cameras. I wonder why a lot of professional photographers don't listen to you. https://petapixel.com/2015/04/24/12-reasons-photographers-still-choose-to-shoot-film-over-digital/ We already know what your response will be. And don't bother with you "most people .....," comment. We've heard it before. If you really knew the future, you would understand the difference between possibility, (as a premise for quantum computing,) and probability, as used in binary. -- PeterN |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
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 DifferentŠ 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. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On Sun, 03 Jun 2018 17:52:15 -0500, John Turco wrote
in : I heard on the local news, last night, that Canon is going to discontinue its final film camera (a 35mm model). Yet another nail in films's coffin? Film is gonna die because of lack of film products and new advanced cameras. The thing is that someone has to buy them! -- teleportation kills |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On 04/06/2018 04:02, 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*. 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); * 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. Ironically, this is often to do with limitations of the medium. And no amount of measurement or argument is going to shift that perception. -- Cheers, Rob |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
On 04/06/2018 09:15, RJH wrote:
On 04/06/2018 04:02, 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*. 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); * 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. Ironically, this is often to do with limitations of the medium. And no amount of measurement or argument is going to shift that perception. And nobody has mentioned - it's fun! I use my four film cameras regularly (I broke the FT2 - at least I tried to fix it and made it worse). But I wouldn't be without the DSLR and smart phone. -- Mike Headon R69S R850R IIIc IIIg FT FTn FT2 EOS450D e-mail: mike dot headon at enn tee ell world dot com --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
End Of An Era:
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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|