stefan@2s-image.de
Date: 05/15/01-01:21:32 AM Z
totally agree...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Miller" <gmphotos@earthlink.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 7:16 AM
Subject: Re: Digital Negs - Gentle Rebuttal
> Traditional photography is not going away. Digital is just another tool,
> another medium available to artists. Just as acrylics did not obliterate
> oils, and pastels have not made charcoal extinct, film and wet darkroom
> procedures will still remain. I think though that a split will occur
where
> commercial photography will go digital, they will have to in order to
> compete and give faster turnaround and digital files to clients. The
> handwork will go over to mostly the 'fine artists', just like handcrafted
> items are still being made by artisans and artists alike right along with
> machine made, mass produced items. One is not better or worse then the
> other. Digital and conventional photography tools are just that, tools to
> be used by anyone in whatever way he/she sees fit. I am always surprised
by
> how passionately photographers and other artists argue over digital. It
is
> either a blessing or a curse. But haven't we been here before. Does
anyone
> recall that thing about photography being the death of painting? Rather
> then killing painting photography opened painting up into a more personal
> and expressive medium and paved the way for impressionism. Digital has
the
> potential not to kill traditional photography, but the free it up. I free
> use digital and film and historical process. Call me daring, but I don't
> care what the medium as long as I can express my creativity.
>
>
> Gary Miller
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 07/12/01-11:29:40 AM Z CST