View Single Post
  #7  
Old March 9th 05, 03:22 AM
Dr. Georg N.Nyman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Shelley wrote:
Why, in all the arguments about digital vs. real film, does the
"elephant in the living room" get left out of the discussions so
frequently? I'm referring, of course, to the simple fact that as of the
present moment, long-term survivability of digital images is something
no one can predict or guarantee.



Here are just a few considerations: (big snip)



Left out of the discussion so frequently? Good grief, where have you been
all these years? Everything you mention has been pointed out, talked about,
discussed, debated, argued, hashed and rehashed endlessly ad nauseum over
and over and over again here and everywhere else for years. Next you'll be
telling us about Nikon's new F2 camera.


I support these concerns - yes, stored information can waste away ( fire
or water on film as a good example) but nothing is worse than being
aloof and thinking that everything has been pointed out, talked about
discussed etc....Wait and see how all these wonderful digital storage
media behave in 20 or 30 years from now, if they were able to store
properly the bits and bites and if we still can read them. Tell me, how
would you suggest to read files which have been saved on an Atari
computer from the mid 80's (I am sure you know that Atari has produced
very innovative office computers at that time) - their file format is
not standard anymore, right?
What will be standard in 30 years from now? How will we be able to
retrieve visual information? I have got glass plates with travel
photographs from the late 19th century and yes, I still can print them,
reproduce them and look at them.....
Oh, before I forget, the most recent camera from Nikon is not the F2 but
the F6, which happens to be a film camera :-))
rgds George

"LR Kalajainen" wrote in message
...

Why, in all the arguments about digital vs. real film, does the
"elephant in the living room" get left out of the discussions so
frequently? I'm referring, of course, to the simple fact that as of the
present moment, long-term survivability of digital images is something
no one can predict or guarantee.

Here are just a few considerations:

1. Software obsolescence: will the next generation(s) of programs be
backward compatible?.
2. Technological hardware development and obsolescence: will the next
machines render images inaccessible?
3. Media for storage; how many hard drives must one have? And even
they have a mechanical shelf-life. No CD's known to this point are
reliable long-term.
4. Digital print longevity: getting better, but nowhere near B&W
silver images.

I have no quarrel with commercial photogs who use digital; makes perfect
sense. Theirs is an ephemeral world anyway. However, I do worry what
images historians and cultural anthropologists 200-300 years from now
will have to work with if film loses to digital. Photographs, among
other things, are records. We can study ancient Egypt because they
carved their hieroglyphics in stone. We can appreciate the beauty of
medieval manuscripts copied on paper with pigment inks. How will future
generations study us?