If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
Ric Trexell wrote:
"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message .com... This report is likely to only be of interest to those still shooting film (i.e., what this newsgroup is *supposed* to be about). Being out of slow-speed color print film, went to Target[1] yesterday with hopes that they'd still have film. ************************************************** ************************ Digital has some problems that I'm seeing already. One, while we who are discussing it are using computers, some people don't like computers or printing out pictures with a printer. They may only take a few rolls per year and they will just give up on photography or get a disposable film camera. I rather think they will just get a digi p&s, and take the card in for printing, just the same as if it were film. The kids these days clamor to see the picture on the lcd, and it throws them when there is no viewing on a film camera. As has been mentioned, storage is still not something that people do. Many photos are taken with cell phones but are not preserved on a CD. Ask people about archival CD's and they ask, What's that? I remember many times in the pre-digital days when a woman at work would bring in a whole bunch of photos of her grandkids to pass around. Yes, but what did she do with the negatives? Most people junk the negs when they have the prints, so archiving the images off the card wouldn't interest them, specially when Kodak proclaim you don't need the negs, just bring us the print to copy. You don't see that any more. Yes, they show you one picture on their cell phone that is the size of a postage stamp and that is it. The fad will die out someday and people will return to film. Ric. Cellphones cameras may - should? - die out, but that cannot be extrapolated to include digital cameras. I used my film camera, an EOS 10, when I was in Hong Kong in 1993, and took hundreds of shots on negative film. The prints I got are pretty good still, but I have been thinking of making a sound-slide show from the negs, and started to scan them on my Canon 9950F, a high-end scanner. The scans are nowhere near as good as the prints. They show crossed color, i.e. green highlights and purple shadows. Clearly the film is not lasting too well after 15 years in the plastic sleeves and stored in the top of a wardrobe - a dry one at that. About the only film that lasts is Kodachrome, which is/was no good if you want prints. Granted, it can be easy to lose digital images, but diligent care and backup routines can greatly reduce the chances of loss, and as long as they exist the color will remain just as taken, unlike film. I know many people have stated that they have old negatives stored for umpteen years and they are perfect - until they come to scan or reprint them and they see what's happened to the dyes. Sub-optimal processing has a lot to do with how well negatives keep, and that's a completely unknown parameter. Kodak's term for dyes is 'fugitive'. What does that tell you about long-term storage? The short answer is, digital storage with sensible backups stored at multiple sites using the current technology of the time will give a digital image a theoretically infinite lifetime. Can you say that about negatives? Colin D. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
Bill Graham wrote,on my timestamp of 19/02/2009 9:40 AM:
This may all be true, but when the only way to get it is to purchase it by mail order from specialty shops at some ridiculous elevated price, Interestingly enough, mail order specialty shops are exactly and precisely the CHEAPEST way of getting film right now and have been for years, and getting cheaper by the minute. But nothing like spreading FUD, eh? But this convenience will be nullified when there is no more film available anywhere in town, and I have to order it from some weird collector somewhere. There is no such thing as film collectors, there will never be. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
Noons wrote:
Bill Graham wrote,on my timestamp of 19/02/2009 9:40 AM: There is no such thing as film collectors, there will never be. Yes, there are. There are a few people that collect old fim in it's original package. Often they collect other things, like instruction books, etc and many also collect cameras. They display the camera with the film that would have been available when the camera was sold. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
Ric Trexell wrote:
"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message .com... This report is likely to only be of interest to those still shooting film (i.e., what this newsgroup is *supposed* to be about). Being out of slow-speed color print film, went to Target[1] yesterday with hopes that they'd still have film. ************************************************** ************************ Digital has some problems that I'm seeing already. One, while we who are discussing it are using computers, some people don't like computers or printing out pictures with a printer. I gave my 6 Mpix DSLR to my SO. She shot a couple dozen phots while at a retreat up north. Now she has no idea what to do with them. "Where to keep", "how to edit for printing" etc. Will be a haul of sorts... -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. -- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
Beefy LaSleep wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 14:15:39 -0500, Alan Browne wrote: And a bit pricey. Not to mention rude, arrogant and service adverse. Last time I went to look for Velvia at San Jose Camera & Video (I dunno, they're a usually well stocked store, but often rather rude in there! Must have gotten inspiration from Keeble & Shuchat. I have to say, however, that K&S' equipment rental business (other side of the street) is very professional, helpful and polite. With that in mind, and as I say I often get around the Bay mostly from Palo Alto-Hayward, south to Monterey-Salinas, Santa Cruz, and all of Silicon Valley in general. What's your recommendation for a store with the kinds of films like Velvia, along with personnel who are kind enough to thank you for your business?? No idea, I live far away... - but went to K&S on a recommendation from several people on these NG's while in the area last summer. They also suggested other stores. See Paul Furman's posts. I have nothing against K&S, I would just hope that they remember where there bread is buttered and begin to respect that. I wrote them an e-mail on the subject. No reply. Go figure. -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. -- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote in message ... Noons wrote: Bill Graham wrote,on my timestamp of 19/02/2009 9:40 AM: There is no such thing as film collectors, there will never be. Yes, there are. There are a few people that collect old fim in it's original package. Often they collect other things, like instruction books, etc and many also collect cameras. They display the camera with the film that would have been available when the camera was sold. Geoff. -- There are also people who buy it and freeze it for future use when it will (presumably) no longer be available.....I suspect that cosmic radiation will cause it to deteriorate in spite of their freezers, however. Perhaps a lead-lined freezer would work...... |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
"Ric Trexell" wrote in message net... "David Nebenzahl" wrote in message .com... This report is likely to only be of interest to those still shooting film (i.e., what this newsgroup is *supposed* to be about). Being out of slow-speed color print film, went to Target[1] yesterday with hopes that they'd still have film. ************************************************** ************************ Digital has some problems that I'm seeing already. One, while we who are discussing it are using computers, some people don't like computers or printing out pictures with a printer. They may only take a few rolls per year and they will just give up on photography or get a disposable film camera. As has been mentioned, storage is still not something that people do. Many photos are taken with cell phones but are not preserved on a CD. Ask people about archival CD's and they ask, What's that? I remember many times in the pre-digital days when a woman at work would bring in a whole bunch of photos of her grandkids to pass around. You don't see that any more. Yes, they show you one picture on their cell phone that is the size of a postage stamp and that is it. The fad will die out someday and people will return to film. Ric. You can display them to your friends on laptops....That's what a few of my friends do. With today's multi-gigabyte hard drives, you can hold a hell of a lot of photos on a lap top. I know musicians who also use them to hold their music in PDF format.....They can put literally thousands of songs (which only use 20 or 30 kilobytes each) on a laptop, and carry it to the gig and put it on their music stand. This also gives them the ability to play in the dark, since the laptop carries it's own light, so to speak. A lot of stages are poorly lit. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
"Colin.D" wrote in message ... Ric Trexell wrote: "David Nebenzahl" wrote in message .com... This report is likely to only be of interest to those still shooting film (i.e., what this newsgroup is *supposed* to be about). Being out of slow-speed color print film, went to Target[1] yesterday with hopes that they'd still have film. ************************************************** ************************ Digital has some problems that I'm seeing already. One, while we who are discussing it are using computers, some people don't like computers or printing out pictures with a printer. They may only take a few rolls per year and they will just give up on photography or get a disposable film camera. I rather think they will just get a digi p&s, and take the card in for printing, just the same as if it were film. The kids these days clamor to see the picture on the lcd, and it throws them when there is no viewing on a film camera. As has been mentioned, storage is still not something that people do. Many photos are taken with cell phones but are not preserved on a CD. Ask people about archival CD's and they ask, What's that? I remember many times in the pre-digital days when a woman at work would bring in a whole bunch of photos of her grandkids to pass around. Yes, but what did she do with the negatives? Most people junk the negs when they have the prints, so archiving the images off the card wouldn't interest them, specially when Kodak proclaim you don't need the negs, just bring us the print to copy. You don't see that any more. Yes, they show you one picture on their cell phone that is the size of a postage stamp and that is it. The fad will die out someday and people will return to film. Ric. Cellphones cameras may - should? - die out, but that cannot be extrapolated to include digital cameras. I used my film camera, an EOS 10, when I was in Hong Kong in 1993, and took hundreds of shots on negative film. The prints I got are pretty good still, but I have been thinking of making a sound-slide show from the negs, and started to scan them on my Canon 9950F, a high-end scanner. The scans are nowhere near as good as the prints. They show crossed color, i.e. green highlights and purple shadows. Clearly the film is not lasting too well after 15 years in the plastic sleeves and stored in the top of a wardrobe - a dry one at that. About the only film that lasts is Kodachrome, which is/was no good if you want prints. Granted, it can be easy to lose digital images, but diligent care and backup routines can greatly reduce the chances of loss, and as long as they exist the color will remain just as taken, unlike film. I know many people have stated that they have old negatives stored for umpteen years and they are perfect - until they come to scan or reprint them and they see what's happened to the dyes. Sub-optimal processing has a lot to do with how well negatives keep, and that's a completely unknown parameter. Kodak's term for dyes is 'fugitive'. What does that tell you about long-term storage? The short answer is, digital storage with sensible backups stored at multiple sites using the current technology of the time will give a digital image a theoretically infinite lifetime. Can you say that about negatives? My scans of old slides are pretty good.....Especially the Kodachromes....I have some that are over 50 years old. And, Photoshop is capable of restoring many that are faded and moldy due to bad storage and other things. I think the thing for me to do is to do both....Scan the slides into some digital storage device, and then store the film in as clean and dry a place as possible. I recently bought a Western Digital external 350 gigabyte hard drive for $70....And I have seen drives larger than 500 gigs on the internet for sale for less than $100.....Mostly refurbished. With prices like this, losing your digital data is your own fault! |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
I never said that digital didn't have some great things going for it, the
reason I see it as a fad is that you first have to look at it as the majority see it. Those of us that are into photography and computers have lost the sense of how difficult these are for some people. The majority of photos are not taken by the person with a $300 SLR or the computer whiz kid. The majority I would say are the mothers that take pictures of little Bobby on his first birthday and when he puts on his little league baseball cap at the age of eight. Maybe gramma takes a few too. They may shoot 30-40 pictures and have dad print out the best two or three. Maybe he will burn them to a CD. Chances are they will never be put on archival quality CD's and eventually when the HD crashes or the CD becomes unreadable they will long for the days when they could just get pictures from the drug store and throw out those useless negatives, but keep the pictures in a cardboard box. I'm already hearing of friends that have unreadable CD's. Now those of you that have $3000 Nikon's and buy top grade CD's will have them for years, maybe decades. If you don't think what I say is true, ask your friends how they preserve their digital pictures. You will get the 'you cans', as in you can put them on a CD. Then ask them if that is what they do and do they use archival CD's? I think you will soon agree with me that the vast majority of digital pictures will be gone for good in the next decade. Ric. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Report: Film still available
On 2/20/2009 6:11 PM Ric Trexell spake thus:
I think you will soon agree with me that the vast majority of digital pictures will be gone for good in the next decade. To which I can only say: [wait for it] ... Good riddance! -- Personally, I like Vista, but I probably won't use it. I like it because it generates considerable business for me in consulting and upgrades. As long as there is hardware and software out there that doesn't work, I stay in business. Incidentally, my company motto is "If this stuff worked, you wouldn't need me". - lifted from sci.electronics.repair |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Canon S3 report | SJ | Digital Photography | 7 | October 5th 06 04:25 PM |
Multiblitz Report | loionan | Other Photographic Equipment | 0 | March 6th 06 07:29 AM |
[OT] Troll Report | George Kerby | Digital Photography | 5 | March 11th 05 01:54 AM |
Agfa d-lab.2 report (NPH) | Bill Tuthill | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | August 23rd 04 06:04 PM |
Agfa d-lab.2 report (NPH) | Bill Tuthill | Film & Labs | 0 | August 23rd 04 06:04 PM |