 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / November 2004Yet more evidence of the dominance of digital/demise of darkroom?
Data point: in the latest Costco catalog (no, I'm not a member, it's someone else's), out of their offering of 36 cameras, only *one* is not digital. (It's a Konica Minolta Maxxum 70 SLR.) Can you say "nails in the coffin"? DISCLAIMER: I'm no fan of digital. I love "traditional" wet photography. I love old cameras. But I also try to recognize reality. I rue this trend the same way I rue the results of the recent election.  Signature... voting for John Kerry now is like voting for LBJ in 1964 with full precognition of what he was going to do in Vietnam for the next four years. - Alexander Cockburn in _Counterpunch_ (http://counterpunch.org/cockburn10282004.html) > Data point: in the latest Costco catalog (no, I'm not a member, it's someone > else's), out of their offering of 36 cameras, only *one* is not digital. (It's [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > love old cameras. But I also try to recognize reality. I rue this trend the > same way I rue the results of the recent election. In the same time, Sanyo (a big maker for Olympus and Nikon) and Canon reduce their production of digital cameras because demand is lower than expected ... Regards, SignatureClaudio Bonavolta http://www.bonavolta.ch Aw, this digital argument is getting soooo old. I'm a Vector fanatic. Anybody wanna argue Vectors vs. Raster? Come on. Make my day.;) -- graphic artist off duty On 11/6/2004 1:51 PM jjs spake thus: > Aw, this digital argument is getting soooo old. > > I'm a Vector fanatic. Anybody wanna argue Vectors vs. Raster? Come on. Make > my day.;) Well, sh.t, that's easy: obviously, vectors are better! In most cases. I speak semi-seriously since I'm a printer, and dread the times that someone comes in with a business card design to be printed ... as a Photoshop file. Bzzzzzt! Wrong format! (If I went ahead and printed it, they'd say "How come all the type is so fuzzy?") Almost as bad as the folks who want me to print stuff from Word documents and Powerpoint presentations ... not to mention Micro$oft Publisher ... On the other hand, I'd hate to have to process a 20x36" poster of a color photograph as a vector file: my poor RIP would be grinding away for a week! Signature... voting for John Kerry now is like voting for LBJ in 1964 with full precognition of what he was going to do in Vietnam for the next four years. - Alexander Cockburn in _Counterpunch_ (http://counterpunch.org/cockburn10282004.html) > Data point: in the latest Costco catalog (no, I'm not a member, it's someone > else's), out of their offering of 36 cameras, only *one* is not digital. (It's [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > love old cameras. But I also try to recognize reality. I rue this trend the > same way I rue the results of the recent election. If you want lots of agreement you could post it in rec.photodigital where it probably belongs, since this in fact is rec"darkroom" for which unless you have the shades drawn does not apply to digital photography. SignatureLF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 > > Data point: in the latest Costco catalog (no, I'm not a member, it's someone > > else's), out of their offering of 36 cameras, only *one* is not digital. (It's [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > belongs, since this in fact is rec"darkroom" for which unless you have the shades > drawn does not apply to digital photography. I would argue the little tiny space between the lens and the CCD on a digital camera "is" a wee tiny little darkroom. Yes, this is rec.photo.darkroom but nowhere does it have to say "traditional" whatever that means. > I would argue the little tiny space between the lens and the CCD on a > digital camera "is" a wee tiny little darkroom. Yes, this is > rec.photo.darkroom but nowhere does it have to say "traditional" whatever > that means. You can argue all you like in my kill file. SignatureLF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 > > I would argue the little tiny space between the lens and the CCD on a > > digital camera "is" a wee tiny little darkroom. Yes, this is > > rec.photo.darkroom but nowhere does it have to say "traditional" whatever > > that means. > > You can argue all you like in my kill file. Good grief. I can see why people leave this place in droves. Last time I checked my darkroom was loaded full of digital equipment, timers, densitometers, color computers all 20 years old the most recent addition is a computer. Yawn. So long everybody. > > > I would argue the little tiny space between the lens and the CCD on a > > > digital camera "is" a wee tiny little darkroom. Yes, this is [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > densitometers, color computers all 20 years old the most recent addition is > a computer. Yawn. So long everybody. Yawn...Digital imaging means photoelectric, not densitometers. One should think before making fallacious statements. Densitometers are not used in digital imaging nor is my Gralab digital timer... > > I would argue the little tiny space between the lens and the CCD on a > > digital camera "is" a wee tiny little darkroom. Yes, this is > > rec.photo.darkroom but nowhere does it have to say "traditional" whatever > > that means. Bull sh.t. There simply is no end to digital moronic claims and silly statements... > You can argue all you like in my kill file. > -- [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable > to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 > > > I would argue the little tiny space between the lens and the CCD on a > > > digital camera "is" a wee tiny little darkroom. Yes, this is [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable > > to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 You miss quoted: that was Alan. SignatureLF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 > > > > I would argue the little tiny space between the lens and the CCD on a > > > > digital camera "is" a wee tiny little darkroom. Yes, this is [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > You miss quoted: that was Alan. I was replying to Alan. >>>>>I would argue the little tiny space between the lens and the CCD on a >>>>>digital camera "is" a wee tiny little darkroom. Yes, this is [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > I was replying to Alan. Why is it that every time, I get so sick of the digital/darkroom arguement that I filter the thread, you guys need to start it up again under a different thread name. Enough already W > Why is it that every time, I get so sick of the digital/darkroom > arguement that I filter the thread, you guys need to start it up again > under a different thread name. > Enough already > W What's "W" stand for "Whiner" :-D Kill file the thread and be done it!!! or specifically blame David N,... he started it. SignatureLF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 > Yet more evidence of the dominance of digital/demise of darkroom? > Data point: in the latest Costco catalog (no, I'm not a member, it's > someone else's), out of their offering of 36 cameras, only *one* is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > DISCLAIMER: I'm no fan of digital. I love "traditional" wet > photography. I love old cameras. But I also try to recognize reality. Hello David, This is a darkroom group. The working definition of this term is commonly understood by all those present, yourself included. The posters and readers here enjoy exercising this particular photographic technology. The processes required and the results they yield are satisfying to them. It is their preferred method of photographic creativity. If this were not the case, they would not be practicing this particular craft and not be reading and posting here on this subject. Yet even with the availability to you of this obvious, common knowledge, you still choose to initiate a new discussion with such inflammatory comments as "demise of darkroom" and "nails in the coffin." And in so doing you intentionally choose to showcase yourself in an extremely poor light as regards the fundamental purpose and day-to-day practices of this group. Why is that? Ken > Data point: in the latest Costco catalog (no, I'm not a member, it's someone > else's), out of their offering of 36 cameras, only *one* is not digital. (It's > a Konica Minolta Maxxum 70 SLR.) Can you say "nails in the coffin"? > > DISCLAIMER: I'm no fan of digital. I love "traditional" wet photography. I > love old cameras. But I also try to recognize reality. Oh gee, what will you do? Maybe you should just go digital. > I rue this trend the > same way I rue the results of the recent election. Like you voted for the democrats (not.) > -- > ... voting for John Kerry now is like voting for LBJ in 1964 with full > precognition of what he was going to do in Vietnam for the next four years. > > - Alexander Cockburn in _Counterpunch_ > (http://counterpunch.org/cockburn10282004.html) On 11/8/2004 11:45 AM Tom Phillips spake thus: >> Data point: in the latest Costco catalog (no, I'm not a member, it's someone >> else's), out of their offering of 36 cameras, only *one* is not digital. (It's [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Oh gee, what will you do? Maybe you should just go digital. Ah, yes, I hear you saying that out of pure spite. Quite your style, that. But my friend, don't you realize that when that big wave comes and smashes everything that's not digital to smithereens, that all of us who like darkroom-type photography will suffer? Including you? No thank you. I won't go digital, not just yet. >> I rue this trend the >> same way I rue the results of the recent election. > Like you voted for the democrats (not.) No, I did not. What of it? (Hint: I didn't vote for the guy who won either.) I vote for democrats, not necessarily Democrats. SignatureDon't blame Ralph Nader: blame Gavin Newsom. > On 11/8/2004 11:45 AM Tom Phillips spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ah, yes, I hear you saying that out of pure spite. Quite your style, that. Not spite, just a total lack of respect... > But my friend, don't you realize that when that big wave comes and smashes > everything that's not digital to smithereens, that all of us who like > darkroom-type photography will suffer? Including you? Oh, the sky is falling the sky is falling! Dear me, what shall we do? "Nothing," saith seer David, "It's like rape, just lay back and enjoy it." Nothing is inevitable, only what we allow. And at least I don't roll over and play dead. Digital lies and then piggy backs itself on film photography in order to gain market share. I've never met a digital geek who didn't utter complete fallacies while knowing absolutely nothing about actual photographic processes, including digital processes. They're so full of digital spin and marketing B.S. attacking film (and have been since day one) it's hard to tell where one lie ends and another begins. "Digital is film" (bull sh.t); "digital kills film resolution" (bull sh.t); "digital is as archival as film" (bull sh.t); "digital has better color (bull sh.t); etc. etc. etc. Digital is about stock options, not photography. Apparently what you can't stand is when someone actually stands up to the lies... > No thank you. I won't go digital, not just yet. Who cares? > >> I rue this trend the > >> same way I rue the results of the recent election. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > -- > Don't blame Ralph Nader: blame Gavin Newsom. Yes, that about says it all re your skewed perspectives. If it weren't for narcissistic self serving Nader, Gore would have won the electorial college in 2000 and Bush would not have been around to run in 2004 and make gay marriage an issue. Any Bush presidency is a Nader victory. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.