Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,570   Posts: 1,545,479   Online: 1242
      
Page 17 of 23 FirstFirst ... 711121314151617181920212223 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 228
  1. #161
    Mark Feldstein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Monterey, CA / BiCoastal NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by elekm View Post
    I recently came across a box of photos that my parents took years ago. It made me wonder if we'll have anything to leave for our future generations. I hope so. Or maybe it won't matter.

    I suppose there will be photo CDs and DVDs that will still be readable. Or not. And perhaps we'll come across a hard drive that is full of images. If you notice, they aren't even called photos, but images. Maybe it's the same thing. Maybe it isn't.
    Yep. I can envision myself going through my uncle's attic, discovering a box and exclaiming:
    "OH ! LOOK !!! It's a big box of pixels !!!" And after carefully opening it... POOF ! [What happened?]. So much for my inheritance.

    Hey, I hear from Ilford that their new lab in San Clemente CA is strictly dip and dunk for film processing. YEA !
    Mark
    _________________________________
    Without guys like John Coltrane, Count Basie and Duke Ellington, life....would be meaningless.

  2. #162

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by elekm View Post
    I recently came across a box of photos that my parents took years ago. It made me wonder if we'll have anything to leave for our future generations. I hope so. Or maybe it won't matter.

    I suppose there will be photo CDs and DVDs that will still be readable. Or not. And perhaps we'll come across a hard drive that is full of images. If you notice, they aren't even called photos, but images. Maybe it's the same thing. Maybe it isn't.
    I have started printing books of our photos, film and digi. I think it is the only way to actually leave something that makes sense instead of incompatible pixels and boxes of unsorted photos. Although I do love looking at random photos in shoeboxes and thinking "ahhh...yes that was blah blah blah".

    This "legacy" stuff is not just photos. I'm thinking that my dad has a garage full of records I can listen to and find out what he liked. What am I going to leave my son? A Spotify playlist and a list of books on a Kindle...I think I'll start buying paper books again. Not sure if I can be bothered with CD though...
    Hasselblad, Mamiya RB, Nikonos, Canon EOS

  3. #163

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Ajman - U.A.E.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    952
    And who knows what will future hides for us with technology, hard drives are also good solutions even they are also risky for damage or whatever, but maybe one day we will see some storage ways that can last longer for film or digital, i try to use both so i can have most of my photos last for long time in the future, but my family are not into photography, so i really don't know who will take care of my artwork and photos when i die.

  4. #164
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Geelong & Castlemaine, Victoria, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,581
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by TareqPhoto View Post
    [...]but my family are not into photography, so i really don't know who will take care of my artwork and photos when i die.

    Take the lot with you.
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

    A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
    —Anon.






  5. #165

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Ajman - U.A.E.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    952
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    Take the lot with you.
    Why, to show GOD and Angels in the last day?

  6. #166
    Paul Goutiere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canmore Ab Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    607
    Images
    10
    One thing for certain, at least so far, that digital doesn't have over film; with film you get to use a film camera.

    With a film camera it isn't so much what you get, it's what you don't get, that I really like. With my ratty old M2
    I get to choose where I focus, my aperture and my film speed without having to read menus. I don't have to turn those features off
    because they aren't there!!

    With my Nikon F2, I get to not have those things as well.....plus I get a
    handy little light meter which I can ignore if I like.

    Then there is the old Rolleiflex K4B.........

    I find the feature of not having features handy to have in a camera. I makes me think I'm participating in the process of photography
    rather than being a victim of it.

  7. #167

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Ajman - U.A.E.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    952
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Goutiere View Post
    One thing for certain, at least so far, that digital doesn't have over film; with film you get to use a film camera.

    With a film camera it isn't so much what you get, it's what you don't get, that I really like. With my ratty old M2
    I get to choose where I focus, my aperture and my film speed without having to read menus. I don't have to turn those features off
    because they aren't there!!

    With my Nikon F2, I get to not have those things as well.....plus I get a
    handy little light meter which I can ignore if I like.

    Then there is the old Rolleiflex K4B.........

    I find the feature of not having features handy to have in a camera. I makes me think I'm participating in the process of photography
    rather than being a victim of it.
    I heard that a lot and many keep saying that shooting with film more fun because it is like you decide for you picture from A to Z, but that doesn't also remove the fact that digital has its advantages over film, see how many people now using digital, back in film time before digital many are suffering to go to labs to get their photos processed and then printed, and then they have mixed feeling about the results after they pay for it, now with digital i can see my results almost instant after i take the shot, i don't need to waste money on having my shot done or processed in digital, so only printing will be that part, even with printing many can buy printers to use at home.

    At the end, trying to make film as it is the only way for joy in photography or making digital as it is the best way and never look back to film will go no where, each side has fans and people to defend and it may be lasting lifetime/forever, so better leave it as it is and enjoy with whatever, i shoot both and it is difficult i have to sacrifice one for another, maybe because i started with digital so that i don't feel i prefer film more, not sure if i started with film first then how i will think about digital afterwords. To me, we will always find positive and negative points with any format.

  8. #168
    Prest_400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Goutiere View Post
    One thing for certain, at least so far, that digital doesn't have over film; with film you get to use a film camera.

    With a film camera it isn't so much what you get, it's what you don't get, that I really like. With my ratty old M2
    I get to choose where I focus, my aperture and my film speed without having to read menus. I don't have to turn those features off
    because they aren't there!!
    Agreed. Many digital cameras (not top range) have a single dial to control shutter and aperture... Mine is the case, so it just goes in Program or Priority.
    Shooting with the OM-1 is more memorable to me, probably due to the more tactile and involving technique.

    But again, each of them has uses and their own flexibility. Doing some fast paced tourism with the m4/3 is a breeze, but for true quality (think contrasty situations Neg film) or better color rendition... There is film.

    What I really dislike, and don't understand; is the people (usually digital shooters) that want film dead: "It's obsolete, who would use it, come on, digital is much better". Of course ignoring these only gives benefits. Mind you, encountered around the internet mostly.

  9. #169

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Goutiere View Post
    One thing for certain, at least so far, that digital doesn't have over film; with film you get to use a film camera.

    With a film camera it isn't so much what you get, it's what you don't get, that I really like. With my ratty old M2
    I get to choose where I focus, my aperture and my film speed without having to read menus. I don't have to turn those features off
    because they aren't there!!

    With my Nikon F2, I get to not have those things as well.....plus I get a
    handy little light meter which I can ignore if I like.

    Then there is the old Rolleiflex K4B.........

    I find the feature of not having features handy to have in a camera. I makes me think I'm participating in the process of photography
    rather than being a victim of it.
    Exactly my feelings. I'm not yet ready to ditch years of aquired photo knowledge and make myself slave to the computer chip.
    And when I handle my still fully functioning Nikon F or Rolleiflex, I feel like I'm using something of real long lasting quality, rather than an automatic plastic pudding with a five year life span.

  10. #170

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    110
    It strikes me that there is no mention here of the expected longevity of different media. I think there was a section in the Way Beyond Monochrome book. Basically, digital media are all going to break down over time. CD's have a short lifespan, but I dont see why there structure should be that different to that of a disc spinning in a harddrive. Maybe its something to do with the difference between having to reflect light (CD) vs creating a EM field (spinning disc harddrive).

    For anyone concerned about digital storage, getting software like Acronis and an external back up drive from one of the big manufacturers who pride themselves on reliability would be a good idea. Seagate have some software which can check for forthcoming drive failure. Certainly, putting something on a harddrive is safer than CD as the physical damage to the disc is reduced by it sitting in a hardshell. There are companies out there who will recover data from a faulty drive. A CD on the other hand is physically vulnerable, and the aluminium just breaks down over time through natural processes. I guess archival stability is a sliding scale, and as an individual, its just not necessary to try and make your pictures last forever. Maybe 100 years would be good. Something which strikes me though is that the only decent pictures of previous generations which we have in my parents home are oil paintings, and then BW images which my grandfather shot on a Rolleiflex.

    My wife is currently pestering me to digitise my negatives. But the process of scanning is so lengthy, I may as well print the decent ones out. I previously had a flatbed scanner and the whole cleaining, scanning, levels adjustments etc probably took as long as printing a negative under the enlarger. The only difference is that with scanning, you end up scanning everything, including the shots you would not bother printing when you look at them on a lightbox. So I kind of concur with opinions higher up the thread. If you want archival pictures, print them!

    The question then becomes how good the paper processing is that you have used. Fixing for the correct length of time is something I cannot be sure of. I only print to RC paper, and there are horror stories of this breaking down over time. On the other hand, fibre-based paper sounds like there is a very good chance of not washing sufficiently. Only time will tell, but it is a more aesthetically pleasing experience, in my opinion, to look at a silver gelatin print than to look at a scanned image on a screen.
    Last edited by hoojammyflip; 09-24-2013 at 06:37 AM. Click to view previous post history.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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