Lets clarify , Steve Mccurry is a man that Kodak gave the last roll of kodachrome to shoot. What he did ? He found a 40 dollars autofocus Nikon camera and finished it. I think We must not get him serious.
Eastman Kodak Co. chose Steve McCurry to shoot the last roll of Kodachrome that was manufactured. He shot it in a $2,449.00 Nikon F6 along with a D700 to check lighting until it was absolutely perfect then exposed the film. He was sponsored in part by National Geographic as he chose to shoot the things that resonated with him be it overseas in India or hanging out in Robert Deniro's home theatre in NYC. By all accounts, while he did not surpass the emotion of "Afghan Girl" he did do the film justice in term of it's color palate, nuance and chose fine subject matter.
Dwayne Steinle, owner and namesake of the lab in Parsons Kansas shot the last roll to ever be processed as it was at the end of the 100+ roll batch that I saw emerge. I shot the last roll in terms of it's chronological order and had over 50 rolls on that last batch that came out on January 17th, 2011...*the* last images ever shot on Kodachrome film that was processed in official Kodak K-14 chemisty.
Jeff Jacobson shot quite a few rolls up until the last day and has come out with a wonderful book with some very dreamy and personal images called "The Last Roll". If I can ever stay off the web long enough, I will come out with my book which is looking *really* good called, "The Kodachrome Project".
To the original post, I would say I only care about high-profile photographers like McCurry giving up film if it hurts the availability of film for me. Many of us are worried, not about some other photographer's choice, but about our own choices being curtailed or terminated because no one buys enough film. We're worried about the impoverishment of the art form due to the demise of the medium we love.
Whether another world-renowned photographer's giving up film has a cascading effect on others' purchase of film, and thus on my ability to get it, I don't know. But the concern about that effect is why I read these threads, myself. Whether these types of threads are helpful to the survival of film, I doubt. But give us all a break, sometimes people who love something and are worried about it just need to do some hand-wringing about it to release the tension!
there is a thread a week like this here on apug, and has been for years.
yes, people are whiners, but aren't they allowed to whine and empathize with eachother ?
photography is their hobby, and when they see a "big name" bailing, well, it can't be good ...
its not hard, to ignore threads like this ..
Worrying and whining does not a film photo make...
Not making film photos will add to the potential in the reduction of film....
Posting threads about film's said demise or ones that even worry about it will surely help it lose traction on the google search addicted internet......
"Get busy Living or get busy Dying"...Morgan Freeman in the "Shawshank Redemption".
See, this is why major multinationals don't use me for high-profile marketing campaigns.
Is there idiots who pay this amount of money to an japanese camera ?Quote:
He shot it in a $2,449.00 Nikon F6
Only I say if american president invites you to a ball at whitehouse , you must spend to suit and codes and traditions.Quote:
Are you implying that imagery that speaks to it's viewer cannot be attained by using a "40 dollars autofocus Nikon camera"?
That mcurry ran to india to shoot another poor indian villager photograph. And americans felt and prayed to their state how advanced and rich they are. This poor man photography of national geographic stinks.