Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,860   Posts: 1,583,140   Online: 874
      
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 55
  1. #21
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Also what's up with the 2013 date and references to Kodak's bankruptcy? It's like the article is from a year ago (not that it's points aren't otherwise valid).
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  2. #22
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by zsas View Post
    Before these malaises were confined to family albums and the real artists were in the galleries and papers, now that the wheat and chaff are in the same pool (ie the Internet)....food for thought (wait where's my camera, I gotta post a pic of this food online ASAP)....
    In general I agree with what you're saying. But lets also consider that since the "cost" of an image is much less and effort to take is much lower people now regularly do things like take pictures of every single meal, drink, etc. Previously people would have had to brought the camera and/or go get the camera and many did not bother.

    By far there's a much larger mountain of crap than compared to previous times. Regardless of the amount of crappy photos being taken in the past the signal to noise now is at a ridiculous low.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  3. #23
    zsas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,962
    Images
    74
    Same could be said for computers, back in the day only those privileged few could compile a program using punch cards fed to the mainframe.....now young folks are producing computer code, get this, aghast, *on a home computer*.....good gosh.....get off my lawn!!!

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/11/18/i...per/index.html
    Andy

  4. #24
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by zsas View Post
    Same could be said for computers, back in the day only those privileged few could compile a program using punch cards fed to the mainframe.....now young folks are producing computer code, get this, aghast, *on a home computer*.....good gosh.....get off my lawn!!!
    Okay so are you saying that photography is better off now that digital is mainstream? I wasn't aware cameras, a tool for visual ART and EXPRESSION, were the same as computers.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  5. #25
    zsas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,962
    Images
    74
    What I am saying is whose to judge and be all "back in the day" re anyone's choice of tool, be it a camera, computer, canvas, wax......

    I use good o'l UNIX (invented in '69) and software that came out just the other day to solve complex analytic questions....


    The artist, should he/she choose, use what is avail.....if he/she wants a 8x10 Kodak D2, that's great, a Nikon D'whatever, that's great too.....same with computers, can you solve the problem using a mainframe, that's great, a brand new piece of software/hardware, that's great too.....

    Whose to judge with emotional-memory-lane that folks today are doing it right/wrong just because access is greater.....

    This is a tired debate, there are two camps and its hard to understand my side for some...

    Fwiw, I only use analog cameras, though I code all day for my profession, I love both.....no one can split me to favor either side and judge anyone whose on either....
    Andy

  6. #26
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    I use unix systems all day to and am not a stranger to any of that but I surely don't equate mainstream accessibility of it to mainstream accessibility of the arts. I consider them two entirely separate worlds and ones I especially like to keep separate from each other.

    Don't get me wrong I do get your point I just disagree that removing the lake of fire results in a higher net gain.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  7. #27
    zsas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,962
    Images
    74
    I guess I see what I do (programming/analytics/bi) as art and science.

    My idol btw one'a my professors declared that programming is 50% science and 50% art).....

    Just remember back in the day, mainframe time was hundreds of dollars an hour....a computer these days is free (eg library)....a 8x10 = mainframe and Nikon Dx = library PC.....

    Just tools....

    Someone can write some great code in vi or notepad at the library......
    Andy

  8. #28
    zsas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,962
    Images
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    I just disagree that removing the lake of fire results in a higher net gain.
    Where did I say that art is "better" today than it was "back in the day"? I didn't. I just said why judge. Do whatcha like a d call it a day.....

    I'd never say that about computing either (it was better in the summer of '69 when Ritchie, Thompson et al cooked up unix vs say VB.... )

    I'd say it was different but whose to judge today's "better"....
    Andy

  9. #29
    Truzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,258
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Okay so are you saying that photography is better off now that digital is mainstream? I wasn't aware cameras, a tool for visual ART and EXPRESSION, were the same as computers.
    Digital cameras basically are computers
    Truzi

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    16,883
    it wasn't a bad article ... i guess.
    the world is all about data now
    i keep seeing those virginia slims ads " we've come a long way baby"
    sure we have, and it cost alot...

    the author got a few thing wrong. Jacques-Mandé Daguerre didn't invent photography in france
    he commercialized it, just like eastman didn't invent roll film, he stole someone else's idea
    and commercialized it. the first kodak's didn't cost 1$ they cost 3 month's wages
    when he ( eastman ) was sued he nearly lost everything.

    Quote Originally Posted by perkeleellinen View Post
    This has happened to me so often that I no longer read comments: many an enjoyable and engaging article has been ruined by the comments. I wonder if there's a way for firefox to block them...

    its not the browser .. its the reader ...
    he/she doesn't have to read the comments.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin