Re: [photo-3d] Digest Number 220

[Olivier Cahen <o_cahen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

	I do not agree that film must last for ever, but it could happen:
- if manufacturers go on making digital cameras with so many useless
tricks that they need to print user's manuals as big as hundred pages;
- if the service of making slides or paper prints from digital images is
not very currently and easily available.
	Digital image quality is progressing very fast, double the pixels each
year, and it will continue up to the equivalent of the film. The
sensitivity to weak light of the CCD array of digital cameras is much
better than the most sensitive film. Correcting errors of the image is
easier and easier with cheap software packages; the economy of film and
development is huge; storing and processing digital images is much
easier than paper or film.
	So that if the use of digital cameras becomes as easy as the film, only
a small group of professionals will continue with the film.


> Message: 13
>    Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:53:00 -0400 (EDT)
>    From: markaren@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Digital Is Good for Film
> 
> I disagree......as an industry " insider" I am reassured that film will
> be here throughout my lifetime. The digital revolution only represents
> 5-8% of photo revenues...just barely raising above current revenues
> generated by 110 film and cameras!
> Every major film mfgr. is producing new and improved films......why?
> Film sales are very strong thanks to digital cameras. New technology
> renews and excites consumer interest in photography period. SLR sales
> are up, film sales are up because new technology puts ALL photo products
> in the forefront of a consumers mind. Through education, many consumers
> learn of the digital pros and cons etc. Many folks who purchase a
> digital camera feel a renewed interest in all aspects of photography.
> They purchase more of everything including lenses, film and
> accessories. And a well intended " digital " customer may purchase a
> 35mm SLR instead.
> Film will disappear no faster than grandma's VHS tapes of the family
> reunion. I expect film and VCR's to remain for a couple of generations.
> Mark Dottle
> 
> http://community.webtv.net/markaren/USVIEWSExchangeFolio
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 14
>    Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 15:11:17 -0400
>    From: Peter Davis <pd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Digital Is Good for Film
> 
> At 02:53 PM 8/30/2000, you wrote:
> >I disagree......as an industry " insider" I am reassured that film will
> >be here throughout my lifetime. The digital revolution only represents
> >5-8% of photo revenues...just barely raising above current revenues
> >generated by 110 film and cameras!
> >Every major film mfgr. is producing new and improved films......why?
> >Film sales are very strong thanks to digital cameras. New technology
> >renews and excites consumer interest in photography period. SLR sales
> >are up, film sales are up because new technology puts ALL photo products
> >in the forefront of a consumers mind. Through education, many consumers
> >learn of the digital pros and cons etc. Many folks who purchase a
> >digital camera feel a renewed interest in all aspects of photography.
> >They purchase more of everything including lenses, film and
> >accessories. And a well intended " digital " customer may purchase a
> >35mm SLR instead.
> >Film will disappear no faster than grandma's VHS tapes of the family
> >reunion. I expect film and VCR's to remain for a couple of generations.
> 
> I could cite many counter-examples, such as vinyl record albums, home
> movies, glass plate photography, optical color separation for printing,
> mechanical typography, drafting on a board, etc.   This is not even
> counting technologies which lost out to directly competing ones, such as
> 8-track tapes or BetaMax video.  I suspect the "bounce" you may be seeing
> now in film and equipment sales is temporary.  We are still very early on
> the digital photography adoption curve.
> 
> I'm not wishing for this, believe me.  I love the look of transparencies in
> a hand-viewer *far* more than any other imaging technology I've ever
> seen.  I'm just trying to recognize the inevitable trends, so we can plan
> for them.
> 
> -pd
> 
> --------
>                               Peter Davis
>                 Funny stuff at http://www.pfdstudio.com
>                 "The artwork formerly shown as prints."
>             Resources for children's writers & illustrators:
>                    http://www.pfdstudio.com/cwrl.html
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 15
>    Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:29:15 -0700
>    From: Herbert C Maxey <bmaxey1@xxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re:Days of film are numbered
> 
> I absolutely disagree. Far too many people rely upon film for everything.
> Digital is getting better, but even the best digital camera can't product
> better quality images than say, my Bessa Rangefinder which was
> discontinued before probably anyone on this list was even born.
> 
> I agree that the movies are on the decline - actually the use of film to
> make home movies is on the decline because of video tape. People still
> use film, however. Especially 16mm, which is readily available if you
> want it. Granted, you probably still have to order it from a dealer.
> Kodak manufacturers many different emulsions still. You have to look for
> them, however.
> 
> I predict film will be with us for many years to come. People seem to be
> taking more and more pictures these days. I used to complain about the
> lack of photographic paper. Kodak used to make perhaps 100 different
> papers, in more than a dozed different sizes and surfaces. But if you
> look around, there are more manufacturers of paper. They partially filled
> the void.
> 
> I do not fear the loss of film, and I do not think digital will
> completely take over.
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
> Message: 17
>    Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:46:44 -0700
>    From: Rory Hinnen <Rory.Hinnen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Re:Days of film are numbered
> 
> Herbert C Maxey wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > I do not fear the loss of film, and I do not think digital will
> > completely take over.
> >
> 
> Nothing ever disappears. TV was supposed to kill the movies. Never
> happened. Beta supposedly failed - it became a professional format.
> Vinyl records are the cool thing to release on nowadays.
> 
> Film will stay, but it may eventually be transformed until we barely
> recognize it.
> 
> r.
> 
> Message: 19
>    Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:39:46 -0700
>    From: Herbert C Maxey <bmaxey1@xxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Re:Days of film are numbered
> 
> >>Nothing ever disappears. TV was supposed to kill the movies. Never
> >>happened. Beta supposedly failed - it became a professional format.
> >>Vinyl records are the cool thing to release on nowadays.
> 
> I think people eventually determine that this modern world offers little
> to compare with the past. Vinyl Records: Archival experts and collectors
> of records seem to agree that there is very little to compare with the
> longevity the simple record offers. Records are preferred over Tape or
> CD, or other technologies of the past. Still widely available, records
> still seem to be secure. Movies are going to be with us..... even created
> with the original Technicolor process because directors realize that this
> decades old technology is superior to anything we have now. The only
> thing TV killed from my perspective, is the desire to watch TV.
> 
> Yup, the past still offers us better technology than modern technology. I
> have observed that many people automatically believe that the past is
> best forgotton. What they did back "then" is not as good as what today's
> modern Technology can offer us. I have observed that in all the talks