Digital vs Film - just give in!

There's no point in even debating this even further. Just tell the
digital people that digital is indeed better and then head off to B&H to
buy your film. That's what I've started doing and I've had much more
peace in my life ever since. I have a digital-head at work that I used
to argue with - but it's just a waste of time. He's convinced that film
is "dead" and that digital is the 100% future of photography - so why
argue? The most recent discussion I had with him, he was amazed that
they still made slide film and still sold viewers for it. I just cut it
short because I knew where he was heading. They just want to be right
and so as far as I'm concerned they are. End of story.

wrote in message
...
There's no point in even debating this even further. Just tell the
digital people that digital is indeed better and then head off to B&H to
buy your film. That's what I've started doing and I've had much more
peace in my life ever since. I have a digital-head at work that I used
to argue with - but it's just a waste of time. He's convinced that film
is "dead" and that digital is the 100% future of photography - so why
argue? The most recent discussion I had with him, he was amazed that
they still made slide film and still sold viewers for it. I just cut it
short because I knew where he was heading. They just want to be right
and so as far as I'm concerned they are. End of story.


Very wise words, indeed! You are to be congratulated for your good sense.
It's a rarity on USENET.

wrote in message
...
There's no point in even debating this even further. Just tell the
digital people that digital is indeed better and then head off to B&H to
buy your film. That's what I've started doing and I've had much more
peace in my life ever since. I have a digital-head at work that I used
to argue with - but it's just a waste of time. He's convinced that film
is "dead" and that digital is the 100% future of photography - so why
argue? The most recent discussion I had with him, he was amazed that
they still made slide film and still sold viewers for it. I just cut it
short because I knew where he was heading. They just want to be right
and so as far as I'm concerned they are. End of story.


Very wise words, indeed! You are to be congratulated for your good sense.
It's a rarity on USENET.

wrote in message
...
There's no point in even debating this even further. Just tell the
digital people that digital is indeed better and then head off to B&H to
buy your film. That's what I've started doing and I've had much more
peace in my life ever since. I have a digital-head at work that I used
to argue with - but it's just a waste of time. He's convinced that film
is "dead" and that digital is the 100% future of photography - so why
argue? The most recent discussion I had with him, he was amazed that
they still made slide film and still sold viewers for it. I just cut it
short because I knew where he was heading. They just want to be right
and so as far as I'm concerned they are. End of story.


Very wise words, indeed! You are to be congratulated for your good sense.
It's a rarity on USENET.

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 23:39:07 GMT, wrote:

There's no point in even debating this even further. Just tell the
digital people that digital is indeed better and then head off to B&H to
buy your film. That's what I've started doing and I've had much more
peace in my life ever since. I have a digital-head at work that I used
to argue with - but it's just a waste of time. He's convinced that film
is "dead" and that digital is the 100% future of photography - so why
argue? The most recent discussion I had with him, he was amazed that
they still made slide film and still sold viewers for it. I just cut it
short because I knew where he was heading. They just want to be right
and so as far as I'm concerned they are. End of story.

Not end of story. This is to inform everyone that we film people are
forming a People's Liberation Army and we are taking to the mountains
with our gear to form a partisan group against the digital invaders!!!
Those with heavy artillery (View Cameras) are especially welcomed.
:-)

THOM

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 23:39:07 GMT, wrote:

There's no point in even debating this even further. Just tell the
digital people that digital is indeed better and then head off to B&H to
buy your film. That's what I've started doing and I've had much more
peace in my life ever since. I have a digital-head at work that I used
to argue with - but it's just a waste of time. He's convinced that film
is "dead" and that digital is the 100% future of photography - so why
argue? The most recent discussion I had with him, he was amazed that
they still made slide film and still sold viewers for it. I just cut it
short because I knew where he was heading. They just want to be right
and so as far as I'm concerned they are. End of story.

Not end of story. This is to inform everyone that we film people are
forming a People's Liberation Army and we are taking to the mountains
with our gear to form a partisan group against the digital invaders!!!
Those with heavy artillery (View Cameras) are especially welcomed.
:-)

THOM

"Jeremy" wrote in message
nk.net...

wrote in message
...
There's no point in even debating this even further. Just tell the
digital people that digital is indeed better and then head off to B&H to
buy your film. That's what I've started doing and I've had much more
peace in my life ever since. I have a digital-head at work that I used
to argue with - but it's just a waste of time. He's convinced that film
is "dead" and that digital is the 100% future of photography - so why
argue? The most recent discussion I had with him, he was amazed that
they still made slide film and still sold viewers for it. I just cut it
short because I knew where he was heading. They just want to be right
and so as far as I'm concerned they are. End of story.


Very wise words, indeed! You are to be congratulated for your good sense.
It's a rarity on USENET.



I agree totally. I tested the quality of a 3.2megapixel camera and compared
it with the same shot taken with my RB67 and a comparable lens. The film was
superior! I managed to enlarge the negative to 16 X 20 before I got
noticible grain (using Kodak 160 film); The digital format was "digitized"
as soon as I tried to print in the 11 X 14 size using an Epson 600dpi photo
printer. I will continue to shoot film!

"Jeremy" wrote in message
nk.net...

wrote in message
...
There's no point in even debating this even further. Just tell the
digital people that digital is indeed better and then head off to B&H to
buy your film. That's what I've started doing and I've had much more
peace in my life ever since. I have a digital-head at work that I used
to argue with - but it's just a waste of time. He's convinced that film
is "dead" and that digital is the 100% future of photography - so why
argue? The most recent discussion I had with him, he was amazed that
they still made slide film and still sold viewers for it. I just cut it
short because I knew where he was heading. They just want to be right
and so as far as I'm concerned they are. End of story.


Very wise words, indeed! You are to be congratulated for your good sense.
It's a rarity on USENET.



I agree totally. I tested the quality of a 3.2megapixel camera and compared
it with the same shot taken with my RB67 and a comparable lens. The film was
superior! I managed to enlarge the negative to 16 X 20 before I got
noticible grain (using Kodak 160 film); The digital format was "digitized"
as soon as I tried to print in the 11 X 14 size using an Epson 600dpi photo
printer. I will continue to shoot film!

From: "Robert C."

I tested the quality of a 3.2 megapixel camera and compared it with
the same shot taken with my RB67 and a comparable lens. The film was
superior!

Wow! Who'd a thunk it!

LOL.

From: "Robert C."

I tested the quality of a 3.2 megapixel camera and compared it with
the same shot taken with my RB67 and a comparable lens. The film was
superior!

Wow! Who'd a thunk it!

LOL.