A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

is it a forgone conclusion...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 24th 05, 10:26 PM
Nicholas O. Lindan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Steven Kefford" ""keff.antispam\"@ f2s.com" wrote

What about the death of B&W when colour hit mainstream?


Hmm. Can't get B&W at the drugstore any mo they used to have
Panatomic-X, Plus-X, Tri-X, Verichrome, Royal pan. One carried
4x5 and Tri-Chem packs. You could tell when the pharmacist was
also a photographer.

The drugstore now has a larger display of write-able CD/DVD and
ink jet supplies than it does of film.

Been a while since I have seen a drugstore with an 'Authorized Leica
Dealer' decal on the window. Last one I saw was somewhere in NW
Minnesota, late 70's/early 80's.

The last _real_ store-front photography store in Cleveland (Foto
Center) is closing in a month. I have been going there for 40 years.

OTOH, DIY B&W is doing fine and doesn't seem to be threatened by
digital as long as you are willing to deal via the internet.

B&W may have tanked about as much as it is going to tank. If it
goes completely under it will be because it is replaced by something
_demonstrably_ better such that nobody will miss silver B&W.
So far, digital isn't it.

Plus ca change, plus c'est la mem chose.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/
  #12  
Old February 24th 05, 10:30 PM
Nicholas O. Lindan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Steven Kefford" ""keff.antispam\"@ f2s.com" wrote

Absolutley. I am one of those who has gone from digital to LF. Well not
totally true, as I still do digital, and have not yet exposed a single
sheet of LF, as I have only had it a few days. Film is still well and
truly alive, and will be so for a considerable time to come.


Yea! A convert! Ring the Bells! Glory to the Trinity! Praise Allah!
Slaughter a goat (er, can we make that an Angus, a nice young tender one...).

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/
  #13  
Old February 24th 05, 10:49 PM
Nicholas O. Lindan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"bob" wrote

Actually it means quite a bit. When you take away all the film that
journalists used to shoot, and all the film that product photogs used to
shoot, and all the film that wedding photogs, portrait studios, and the
like used to shoot, and add to that all the film that the vacation and
family crowd used to shoot, well it doesn't take too much to realize
that at some point there will no longer be a large enough market


Hmmm. All these switched to color from black&white 20+ years ago.
So these markets going digital shouldn't have much impact on B&W -
famous last words, I know.

to justify manufacturing 35mm color film any more.


For print film, I'll agree.

I hope against hope color slides will hang around ... Apres Kodachrome,
le deluge.

Just like there's no LP records,


Have you seen the market for record turntables -- $25K for an 'entry
level' turntable; 99.9% snake oil technology, though.

and soon there will probably be no VHS.


Disc convenience will beat tape every time. And tape data capacity
will stay ahead of disc. Wait for optical tape.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/
  #14  
Old February 25th 05, 12:34 AM
Steven Kefford
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Max wrote:
....
A friend of mine won't stop talking about how film is dead and how much
he loves his digital and how I need to buy one. But why? For now, at

....

Why do digital evangelists have to prophesise that film is dead? Do they
need some extra justification for their switch to digital? Why can't
they be content with their digital, and let others make there own decisions?

Steve
  #15  
Old February 25th 05, 05:01 AM
Scott Coutts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
"Steven Kefford" ""keff.antispam\"@ f2s.com" wrote


Absolutley. I am one of those who has gone from digital to LF. Well not
totally true, as I still do digital, and have not yet exposed a single
sheet of LF, as I have only had it a few days. Film is still well and
truly alive, and will be so for a considerable time to come.



Yea! A convert! Ring the Bells! Glory to the Trinity! Praise Allah!
Slaughter a goat (er, can we make that an Angus, a nice young tender one...).


Yeah, here's another one. Well, I'm just learning, doing a course based
on (at the moment) MF and LF. I've actually only posted here twice after
discovering the group the day before yesterday (: I'm back in the
darkroom and I'm really looking forward to getting into it more and
producing some nice B&W prints! Previously I'd used colour film and had
a lab do all the 'work' for me, then I moved exclusively to digital SLR
work, and now I'm back again to film, hopefully mostly LF and MF. I thik
that means i'm going kinda backwards and sideways (:

Scott.
  #16  
Old February 25th 05, 05:29 AM
Frank Pittel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steven Kefford ""keff.antispam\"@ f2s.com" wrote:
: Max wrote:
: ...
: A friend of mine won't stop talking about how film is dead and how much
: he loves his digital and how I need to buy one. But why? For now, at
: ...

: Why do digital evangelists have to prophesise that film is dead? Do they
: need some extra justification for their switch to digital? Why can't
: they be content with their digital, and let others make there own decisions?

I think that most of them are trying to justify going digital to themselves.
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

  #17  
Old February 25th 05, 05:46 AM
Stefan Patric
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thursday 24 February 2005 00:42, Joe Mama wrote:

that this ng will be irrelevant in a year or so? i certainly hope not,
but film seems to be dieing a slow, painful death.

i'm 43, and it sucks to think that in a decade, or less, that film--as
we knew it--will be gone.


There is one absolute: Progress begets obsolescence. And its corollary
as it relates to capitalism: If it's not profitable, you can't afford
to sell it. But do I think film will disappear entirely in the next
decade or so? Or ever? No. No more so than wainwrights, blacksmiths
or shepards have. Even though they are rare and the services they
provide are from another era and forgotten by most, they are still
needed, and they exist because a market for those services exist. Such
will be the case with film. And just as some are compelled to embrace
the new and abandon the old, just because it's new, there are always a
few traditionalists, who find satisfaction in the old ways, even though
they are considered relics of the past by those who think "new and
improved" always means "better."

So, as long as there are photographers who need film, there will always
be those competing to provide it. That's what makes capitalism and
free enterprise better than any other economic philosophy. Only when
traditional photographers and those who appreciate traditional
photographs cease to exist will film become truly extinct. And when
might that be?

Why can't digital and film co-exist, each on its own merits? Why must
one displace the other?

--
Stefan Patric
NoLife Polymath Group

  #18  
Old February 25th 05, 06:10 AM
Frank Pittel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stefan Patric wrote:
: On Thursday 24 February 2005 00:42, Joe Mama wrote:

: that this ng will be irrelevant in a year or so? i certainly hope not,
: but film seems to be dieing a slow, painful death.
:
: i'm 43, and it sucks to think that in a decade, or less, that film--as
: we knew it--will be gone.

: There is one absolute: Progress begets obsolescence. And its corollary
: as it relates to capitalism: If it's not profitable, you can't afford
: to sell it. But do I think film will disappear entirely in the next
: decade or so? Or ever? No. No more so than wainwrights, blacksmiths
: or shepards have. Even though they are rare and the services they
: provide are from another era and forgotten by most, they are still
: needed, and they exist because a market for those services exist. Such
: will be the case with film. And just as some are compelled to embrace
: the new and abandon the old, just because it's new, there are always a
: few traditionalists, who find satisfaction in the old ways, even though
: they are considered relics of the past by those who think "new and
: improved" always means "better."

: So, as long as there are photographers who need film, there will always
: be those competing to provide it. That's what makes capitalism and
: free enterprise better than any other economic philosophy. Only when
: traditional photographers and those who appreciate traditional
: photographs cease to exist will film become truly extinct. And when
: might that be?

: Why can't digital and film co-exist, each on its own merits? Why must
: one displace the other?

They can and are co-existing. I personally have a digital camera as well
as a number of film camera. They both have their place and advantages.
(as well as disadvantages)
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

  #19  
Old February 25th 05, 07:34 AM
Captain Blammo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yea! A convert! Ring the Bells! Glory to the Trinity! Praise Allah!
Slaughter a goat (er, can we make that an Angus, a nice young tender

one...).

I'm another film convert. I started with a digital, moved up a couple of
models, and then finally realised that the resolution of film is much better
if you use a large enough format, not to mention the better dynamic range.

On top of it all, I've yet to find a way of making digital prints that are
good quality, relatively easy to make, and cheap. Lightjets still cost
$100,000, and even high quality inkjets cost a lot per print, and I'm not

wowed by the quality, either.

I still love digital and use it for a lot of stuff, but I sure wouldn't call
it superior. I will be very grumpy if large format film stops being
available.

Ewan


  #20  
Old February 25th 05, 10:18 AM
Steven Kefford
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stefan Patric wrote:
....

Why can't digital and film co-exist, each on its own merits? Why must
one displace the other?


Is it because our digital friends can only work in binary states: i.e.
digital or none-digital, and one has to be good, the other bad :-)?

Steve
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
color vision spyder and print fix conclusion william kossack Digital Photography 0 January 9th 05 05:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.