Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,535   Posts: 1,544,074   Online: 1107
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Hello!

  1. #11
    SuzanneR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,735
    Images
    139
    Welcome!

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    130
    Hi, JD, great to meetcha..i remember disco and it wasn't all bad, and i shot digital and that wasn't all bad either. Matter of fact, had i not shot digital, i wouldn't be here right now. We digibabes don't just point and shoot, we actually learn bracketing, aperture priority, bulb exposure, DOF control, focal length, ISO, as well as some less meaningful skills like menu scrolling, sub-menu scrolling and sub-sub menu scrolling. But hey, whatever it takes to get the job done is ok..one isn't better than the other, they're just different. But it's true that digital ain't got no soul. The shooter might have soul but the camera ain't got diddley. Film on the other hand is a precious commodity that's got a best-used-by date, holds up well in a fridge and spoils in the heat. Hell, it's practically a tropical fruit (not the photographer, the film). Film is like a living, breathing thing and a negative, well, a negative is the veritable key to magic. A memory card on the other hand is like a Bingo chip, isn't it? As far as Photoshop, well, i think it's a holy thing that's been maligned quite a lot. Of course i have never developed or printed my own film so look for some fast backpeddling when i get to that point!

    take care and n'joy the folks here, they really are super friendly and terrific..i love 'em already (they even forgave my digital past--can ya believe??) kat~

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    262
    Update:

    Just so nobody gets confused, the link in my original post is now dead because the forum administrators deleted the thread. For those that didn't see it I'll sum it up:

    Wedding photogs 10 years experience now shooting Disco zapped an entire wedding into Disco dust. Vaporized into 0s and 1s into electronic oblivion. Bride now has not one image from the event and is a wee bit upset. Something like -- oops, the download didn't take -- guess we should have checked that before re-using our Disco chips......

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by JD Morgan
    Update:

    Just so nobody gets confused, the link in my original post is now dead because the forum administrators deleted the thread. For those that didn't see it I'll sum it up:

    Wedding photogs 10 years experience now shooting Disco zapped an entire wedding into Disco dust. Vaporized into 0s and 1s into electronic oblivion. Bride now has not one image from the event and is a wee bit upset. Something like -- oops, the download didn't take -- guess we should have checked that before re-using our Disco chips......
    i know lots of film folks who have nightmare stories like that too. It's a shame that it ever happens, whether the fluke be digital or analog. To get a sly giggle out of the misfortune of a digital shooter is just plain bad karma, IMO. After all, we're all shooters, are we not? :rolleyes:

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    262
    Wasn't a sly giggle I got, I roared... really.

    Why? Because the Disco kids have made it an us vs. them game. I spent many hours in photo forums over the last three or four years watching film shooters shown the door incrementally. I personally know of no film shooters who have lost an entire wedding.

    Disco kids refuse to debate the CD vs. Eight-track analogy nor fess up to the archive problem. Disco is not about photography, it's about money. I hear the way they sell Disco to their naive clients, never mentioning the archive problems or the possibility that in a few years when they open their CD there might be nothing on it etc. But they will charge them the same and more than if they were using film. They claim the equip. etc. costs more -- and they use a Disco Rebel!

    Pffft. Nope, gots no sympathy for them.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by JD Morgan
    Wasn't a sly giggle I got, I roared... really.

    Why? Because the Disco kids have made it an us vs. them game. I spent many hours in photo forums over the last three or four years watching film shooters shown the door incrementally. I personally know of no film shooters who have lost an entire wedding.

    Disco kids refuse to debate the CD vs. Eight-track analogy nor fess up to the archive problem. Disco is not about photography, it's about money. I hear the way they sell Disco to their naive clients, never mentioning the archive problems or the possibility that in a few years when they open their CD there might be nothing on it etc. But they will charge them the same and more than if they were using film. They claim the equip. etc. costs more -- and they use a Disco Rebel!

    Pffft. Nope, gots no sympathy for them.
    It seems awful much like you're the one making it an us vs. them game now. Too bad you're more focused on splitting the field than sharing your knowlege and experience with a digital shooter who might love to learn more about film. Cameras were developed as a means of reproducing a scene that was more "convenient" than drawing or painting. Digital was developed as a more "convenient" form of reproduction than film. The strengths and weaknesses of both mirror the strengths and weaknesses of both. i.e. the beauty of the silver print vs the inconvenience of the wet darkroom. The marvel of seeing a digital image quickly and easily reproduced on the computer screen vs the easily corrupted digital file. This is such a tired subject, digital vs. film, that it no longer bears discussing. To tell the truth, in my short time here, yours is the first really snide attitude i have seen regarding the subject. It would give me a bad taste in my mouth were it not for the genuinely kind and hearty welcome and encouragement i have received here from those folks seriously and totally devoted to the analog medium. Regards: kat~

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    262
    I have never once since processing my own (1972) ever felt, thought, or conceived of a darkroom as being 'inconvenient.'

    I'm odd I guess, I've been boycotting Wal-Mart for better than 3 years now. I see it as all tied together. A driving need to separate you from your money through instant obsolescence, forced upgrades, etc. The corporate culture of greed will determine what we can have and can't have -- and at what price -- while simultaneously driving your labor rates and wages through the floor.

    I resist that vehemently. I no longer patronize my old favorite shop because every dime of surplus goes to stock something Disco oriented and/or made in China.

    I'm hoping to find companies to send my $$ to for film etc. that are supporting us rather than abandoning us. Film has been the cash cow they have fed on while strategizing how to abandon us slowly enough not to upset their cashflow. If all the film shooters in the world ceased to purchase from the big boys and turned to smaller companies immediately en masse, the cashflow needed to further evolve their incremental strategy would be destroyed.

    Sorry, but I cannot pretend that nails are roses.... I see what I see and call it that way. Even my own father says I'm not polite enough to lie.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    130
    well all that's well and good but the original discussion had to do with a link you said was a "gift" to us. i clicked on it and read the many sympathetic responses to someone who'd obviously lost all her wedding shots due to some faux pas on the part of the photographer. i was immediately sad for both the couple and the photographer. You gloat at the photographer's misfortune. That's seriously mean and small minded on your part. You want to boycott Main Street Camera because they've bowed to the pressure and stocked digital cameras? Be my guest. You want to be happy for the misfortune of another photographer? i take exception. Take care and hope to see your work..i noticed you haven't uploaded anything yet. It will be nice to see your work when you get around to sharing it. Good evening. kat~

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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