Re: Digital Sucks - on topic (politics)

I think that particular difference isn't between digital and film. A
modern electronic camera leaves you in exactly the same position,
whether the image is recorded on film or digital. Many have much the
same bodies, focus systems etc.

I've been let down by my Leica M2 come to that, though I didn't realise
it until I got back home and processed the film. But usually I'm let
down by the photographer :-(

Pinhole cameras are pretty reliable though.

Regards

Peter Marshall
petermarshall@cix.co.uk +44 (0)1784 456474
31 Budebury Rd, STAINES, Middx, TW18 2AZ, UK
_________________________________________________________________
My London Diary http://mylondondiary.co.uk/
London's Industrial Heritage: http://petermarshallphotos.co.uk/
The Buildings of London etc: http://londonphotographs.co.uk/
and elsewhere......

Ehud Yaniv wrote:
> In this case, the biggest difference between digital and film seems to be
> the fact that it is harder to debug and fix digital in the field. With an
> old film camera there are always things one can try to get it working again.
> This is often not the case with digital.
>
> This means that it is up to the photographer to plan for equipment failure
> by having back-up equipment when you must have the shot or when going to
> remote places.
>
> Of course, this is easy to say from my desk.
>
> Ehud
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Burkholder [mailto:fdanb@aol.com]
> Sent: May 25, 2006 6:37 AM
> To: alt-photo-process-L@usask.ca
> Subject: Re: Digital Sucks - on topic (politics)
>
>
> OK, I'll take the bait (seems I can't resist worms of this flavor).
>
> You're upset that a gizmo failed you; therefore you are amazed that
> people on the alt-photo list use digital devices. That's something of a
> leap, Greg.
>
> I've used a Coolpix 5000 for 4.5 years now. It was something of a
> landmark camera in Dec. of 2001 when 5MP was high-res and an auxiliary
> lens took the wide end to 19mm (35mm equiv.). I traveled to Europe and
> the South Pacific with that camera and it never hiccupped once. I even
> wrote a review of the Coolpix for a magazine. Sorry to hear that yours
> has crapped out; it's never fun to be disappointed by hardware. But
> let's be honest, even Leicas and Hasselblads fail now and then.
>
> In all fairness, the tiny 5000 sees little service these days. I've
> moved to a digital SLR that is providing 6 x 4.5 image quality yet
> affords the lens selection associated with 35mm. That is, WAY more focal
> length options than medium or large format. To me, that's a good reason
> to "embrase things with chips." [sic]
>
> But the best thing about digital capture is purely photographic: we can
> do things digitally that we could never have done with film. The High
> Dynamic Range work that is so exciting me now is more fun than sex
> (well, not quite). By jumping through extreme chemical hoops we could
> handle wide scene brightness ranges on black and white film (though not
> approaching digital) but with color there is no game whatsoever. Did you
> ever try to overexpose-and-under-develop with color film? Not much fun
> and not much in results either.
>
> So this morning I'm looking over the 20" x 30"inkjet prints that I
> sprayed with a heavy varnish last evening, making sure the coating is
> even and thick. (If nothing else, maybe this varnish application makes
> the work "alt.") It's thrilling to see the depth of color and detail
> that modern chips, lenses, papers, pigments and varnish can achieve.
>
> Sidebar: if anyone is interested in the varnish specifics (auto paint
> sprayer, compressor, Varnish brand, dilution, technique), I'm happy to
> post that too.
>
> Then I see your post about how your old pro-grade film gear still works
> just fine but your consumer-grade digital camera has broken. Greg, if
> you don't like digital you shouldn't use it. Similarly, if you want
> pro-gear robustness, don't buy amateur cameras. But try to understand
> that you need not be "amazed" that some of us are having a great time
> and making good photographs with (and because of) digital.
>
> By the way, I'm judging a photo competition and teaching a couple
> workshops in Anchorage this summer. Guess I shouldn't count on seeing
> you in the audience since I won't be using or discussing film. ;^)
>
> And yes Greg, no doubt I'll still be using the "old" compressor and
> spray gun long after I've moved on to another digital camera. Like they
> say, "The pioneer get the arrows and the settlers get the land." With
> your Coolpix drama, you've now achieved "Pioneer" status. Congratulations!
>
> Dan
>
>
Received on 05/25/06-10:32:03 AM Z