Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
It is not destroying photo gear; it is destroying imaging gear.

As someone who was brought up in a relatively poor environment, (think having to save up pocket money to buy a 120 film), I'm sickened when I see simpering "rich kids" destroying photo (sorry, imaging :rolleyes: ) for a "laugh".

You may not like digital photography for whatever reason (sorry, imaging :rolleyes: )...but what's the point of destroying good gear? I really hate VW cars , after having owned one which must have been built on a Friday-afternoon (we christened it "Adolf's revenge" ) , but I don't take a hammer to my neighbors Audi.

At the end of the day, digital imaging (got it right that time ) will win the day...it's 95% there now, quicker, easier, cheaper and more reliable for the casual user, and much more versatile, productive and economic for commercial and scientific use. There are things like Astrophotography (which I do myself) where analogue cannot handle most present-day work. Being a Luddite will not alter that.

Yes, some of us, myself included, will continue analogue for some work while materials are available and for particular artistic results , just as I will continue my watercolor painting for another kind of artistic result. But, just as I don't do my laundry by hand nowdays, I shall use the most suitable tools for the job in hand, even if this involves digital imaging (there, I've got it right with no prompting. )