Whenever a technology changes, there is a transition period to go through. Horses, to automobiles in the early 1900's, for example. When automobiles were introduced, they scared the heck out of the horses and the people who were riding them. There are plenty of people where I live in Texas that continue to love horses and ride them for enjoyment whenever they can. However, they drive their pick-up trucks to work. It's just too darn difficult to ride a horse on a busy freeway. It won't be long before all color snapshot photographs will be taken with digital cameras and all color prints will be outputted with inkjet printers, or displayed on a TV screen. That doesn't bother me at all. My wife's Nikon Coolpix is a great little color snapshot camera. However, color snapshots do not nurish my desire to produce a piece of art with my own hands. Only a large silver gelatin print that I made, myself, and hung on my wall, satisfies that need.
> 'cutting edge' comment
I just don't pay any attention to the rantings. A good digital picture is a good picture while otoh a bad digital picture is simply a rapid-access bad picture. I'll bet people were saying that photography went into the can when George Eastman came along.
Random thoughts...I know several photographers who are now using digital; the good photographers are still good photographers and the bad photographers are still bad photographers. The bad photographers used to not know what to throw into the trash, while now they don't know what to erase. None of the good photographers I know make any sort of big deal about that they're using digital while most of the bad photographers I know blather endlessly about their digital whatzits.
I have some of what were once "cutting edge" digital pictures. They were processed using _very_ limited software from JPL and they're on eight-inch floppy disks. Fat lot of good they do me now.
One shouldn't ramble endlessly in the middle of the night....
I think digital was driven in large part by the Dotcom hype machine.
Let's face it, just like many Dotcoms, the hype is almost insanely overblown.
"With this 3 Mp sensor you can rival even Medium Format!"
Yes, I've heard people say that! Even though it makes no sense since MF (and even 35mm and APS! capture MORE than 3Mp of information.
But the hype machine rolls on. Digital prints from cheap inkjets are now supposed to last 200+ years. I'm waiting for the claim that they will last longer than a platinum print...
The average consumer gobbles this crap up. They love it.
Official Photo.net Villain
[FONT=Comic Sans MS]DaVinci never wrote an artist's statement...[/FONT]
It's only just occured to me, but I'm currently getting first-hand experience of one of the best arguments there is against digital. The power supply on my desk-top PC blew up last week, and ever since I've been ordering components for a full upgrade (thought I might as well, since I had been putting it off for ages). When I finally get everything I need the wretched thing still doesn't work - the new power supply looks to be faulty.
I'm currently posting using my rather ancient lap-top, which couldn't begin to support a modern digital camera, let alone cope with large image photoshopping.
It's at times like these that you really value the fact that with traditional methods you can still go from exposing the film right through to a finished print with technology no more complex than was available in the 19th century!
</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (HuwEvans @ Sep 10 2002, 03:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>It's at times like these that you really value the fact that with traditional methods you can still go from exposing the film right through to a finished print with technology no more complex than was available in the 19th century!</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
I repair electronic equipment for a living, and have seen micro technology fail, usually at the worst time. Thats why I prefer mechanical film cameras. I have seen some digital cameras made obsolete because they do not make the smaller memory cards anymore.. just buy a new one every year..
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
The other day I was shocked to see a photo magazine that named a digital camera "camera of the year". Not "digital camera of the year", but "camera of the year". This wasn't a 100% digital magazine either. It was one of those hybrid mags seemed like 70% digital 30% traditional (can't recall the name). So now we're seeing digital equipment loose the digital label as well as prints. It's no longer digital camera or camera, just 'camera', no longer digital photography or digital illustration, just 'photograph'. I know it's silly to be so concerned with labels, but it's crazy to see the consumer market drive things like this. Anyway...
Hardcore said it . It is about speed , quick fix, and let's not forget saving money( they think).
The direction our society ahs taken is about quantity over quality, about getting to the result right away without understanding the process.
Let's not forget that Photoshop has named many tools after traditional photography, and people who use this tools i am sure have no idea why they are called that way. ( dodge, burn, gradient.....).
That is why craftmanship is disappearing, and mass produced ugly things have invaded the market in every aspect of our life.
I do use photoshop, but only for a starting point, to see the potential a negative has , then i close myself in my beloved darkroom and stay there many ours.
I get out of there with a sense of accomplishment that my Mac cannot give me , i feel beetween my smelly hands the wonderful texture of wet fiber based paper, and the knowledge that i am responsiblle for those images and not a bunch of 0s and 1s cramming my computer.
Even photographic retailers aren't achieving the projected sales of digital cameras, and are having to downsize their operations, because so many of the general public can see no point of buying a camera, when they can take pictures on their mobile phones .
I guess the fact that I actually am a boring, luddite elitist takes the sting out of that particular insult
Originally Posted by Sean
That is called grain. It is supposed to be there.
Hey! I resemble that!
Originally Posted by Flotsam
When I get home again, I'll start looking for subjects with high "Plattenwürdigkeit"
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist