[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Anticipating the future
Ah, but has anybody noticed that vinyl has taken on a mystique now, somewhat
akin to "alternative photography" of five years ago? Yes, just as soon as
most people have thrown out the turntable, back it comes, with a hoard of
new admirers. Some "avant garde" work is ONLY available now on vinyl.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Miller [mailto:gmphotos@earthlink.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 12:47 AM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: Anticipating the future
The onslaught of digital versus film reminds me of another bit of recent
history, which involved the music industry. I remember when CD's first
appeared and it was said that they would replace all vinyl records. Well,
the first time around some people bought the CD's, the new technology
embracers, but still more bought the regular vinyl records. This went on
for a few years until one day they just stopped making the vinyl. You had
to adapt or perish and give in to buy the CD's, the players, the carrying
cases, etc. There is still a demand for vinyl albums, but the production is
very limited. Film will likely fall into the same trap. If we do not
accept the newer technology of digital then it will be thrust upon us just
like so many vegetables on our dinner plate as children. Some day soon film
production will just be cut way down and the fight will be over, end of
story.
Gary Miller
> From: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>
> Reply-To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
> Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 22:18:28 -0500 (EST)
> To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
> Subject: Re: Anticipating the future
>
>
>
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2000, Larry Watson wrote:
>
>> The moral problem is that if you build a cottage industry
>> to manufacturer film you hasten the demise of the current
>> source. Then what happens if the cottage industry goes under,
>> or has enough of a monopoly to squeeze the price up and up.
>
> Indications are, or at least my "radical" sources claim, that the films
> being discontinued are NOT because there wasn't demand, or they weren't
> profitable, but in a calculated move to make every one go digital -- which
> is MUCH MUCH more profitable. These companies are making their major money
> from selling softwear and hardware, not film.
>
> For instance, I bought a used Omega D2V enlarger in 1985 for $300, and
> will never buy another. I cannot possibly calculate how much money I've
> spent on digital equipment, hard and soft, since that time -- and the pace
> picks up. This past year, for instance $2000 for one scanner (that has yet
> to work, but that's another story). I MUST have an Epson printer, tho I
> haven't bought that yet, pressure grows to upgrade the Mac OS, and I limp
> along with Photoshop 4, to get 5 is more hundreds, etc. etc. etc. etc.
>
> Doesn't everybody?
>
> best,
>
> Judy
>
>