Kodak on digital and film future

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by Michael Scarpitti, Dec 28, 2003.

  1. C'mon Gregory, how many examples of responsible industrial
    conduct are you not mentioning while mentioning two examples
    of irresponsible conduct? If all we do is cite examples of the
    extreme, then we ignore the reality. If industry killed everyone,
    it would eventually impact the bottom line and they'd make less
    money.[/QUOTE]

    Lessee; here in the Bay Area we have:

    - IBM, whose San Jose fabrication plant discharged massive amounts of
    massively carcinogenic solvents into the groundwater during the 1970s;

    - Fairchild; ditto;

    - Petroleum refineries up in Richmond (not too far north from where I live)
    that regularly discharge catalysts, cracking byproducts and other crap into
    the air over the surrounding communities;

    - Red Star Yeast, in nearby West Oakland, a source of formaldehyde discharges
    suspected of causing the high rates of asthma in the 'hood;

    - the Port of Oakland, likewise suspected because of vast amounts of diesel
    exhaust from trucks.

    Just a short list from off the top of my head.

    Pollution isn't just an occasional slip-up on the part of industry; it's
    embedded deep within the system. And expect things to only get worse with the
    current gang of criminals in charge of the national health and environment.

    And it's not a matter of killing people outright: it's a slow, incremental
    process. And usually impossible to pin on a polluter (at least legally
    speaking, even if everyone can see the belching smokestacks a block and a half
    from the elementary school.)
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 1, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Michael Scarpitti

    John Guest

    3.25 words.

    New Jersey

    Superfund

    Regards,

    John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
    Please remove the "_" when replying via email
     
    John, Jan 1, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Michael Scarpitti

    John Guest

    You must have visited Tennessee lately ! The only reason it's
    not a superfund site is the people here are too stupid to care. The
    same people that bulldoze mile after mile of trees and then wonder why
    we're having more tornado's and straight-line damaging winds. Duh !


    Regards,

    John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
    Please remove the "_" when replying via email
     
    John, Jan 1, 2004
  4. Michael Scarpitti

    John Guest

    If you can find a way to adhere it to my shoe I'll gladly
    deliver it.


    Regards,

    John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
    Please remove the "_" when replying via email
     
    John, Jan 1, 2004
  5. Are you saying government should *require* us to buy electric cars and drive
    them?

    Tom, are you a Marxist?

    You seem to be assuming that the people who spend money have no business
    deciding what to spend it on.
     
    Michael A. Covington, Jan 1, 2004
  6. Michael Scarpitti

    John Guest

    I might not go so far as Tom on this issue but I will say that
    the government could certainly do a lot more to make us less dependant
    on foreign oil. Mass transit here in Tennessee is almost completely
    absent. I live just 10 miles from an interstate and have to drive all
    45 miles into Nashville from that point. Why not have trains on the
    rails that the American taxpayer is paying for anyway ? A hybrid car
    could get me onto the train which would eliminate accidents, traffic
    jams and a lot of pollution.


    Regards,

    John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
    Please remove the "_" when replying via email
     
    John, Jan 1, 2004
  7. Michael Scarpitti

    Peter Irwin Guest

    If all of the costs are reflected in the price, then the economic
    choice will also be the most efficient one.

    But this is not the case in the use of non-renewable resources.
    If the price of oil is less than the cost of generating the
    same energy from renewable sources, then there is a massive
    invisible subsidy favoring oil. There may be plenty of oil
    for the near future, but eventually our consumption will pose
    a real problem, and I hope and expect that human society will
    survive long enough. The massive use of non-renewable resources has a
    cost to the future which is not reflected in the price we pay today.

    Fixing the economics so that the price better reflects the whole
    cost, would not be marxism, but a good application of classical
    economics.

    Peter.
     
    Peter Irwin, Jan 1, 2004
  8. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest

    Well first of all if you think your children should die fighting for oil
    then keep thinking internal combustion engine. Second, government can
    support and direct any beneficial industry, easily make or break it.
    It's been done over and over. The problem is it's not always done to
    benefit taxpayers, but to rather benefit special interests. Example: The
    governemt should be encouraging and subsidizing solar energy
    development, to help make it cheap and affordable. It doesn do that
    mainly due to lobbying from oil industry interests.

    Don't fool yourself. The history of the automobile industry in this
    country is a history of government facilitation and favoritism to that
    industry. Taxpayer dollars were spent to build just about every highway
    we have. Why? Because the fledgling auto industry convinced the
    government decades ago it was a better form of public transportation
    than trains or other modes. And why did they do that? So they could sell
    more cars and make more money. Take a look at Europe. You can literally
    go *anywhere* cheaply on a train. Can't do that here. I need a car to go
    anywhere in my city and state. Trains go nowhere convenient. Buses are
    slow and expensive. Like many other industries, government *subsidized*
    the auto industry.

    talk about socialism....
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  9. Mercury? Far more basic than that: try lead. Not only does every monitor
    contain somewhere between 5 and 10 *pounds* of the stuff, it's in every
    circuit board, tinned leads, anywhere there's solder.

    I can't believe it: around here, where I live, I see computer monitors and TV
    sets discarded on the streets EVERY DAY. Some of them end up broken, with the
    lead dispersed onto the street and into the air.

    I'm glad I'm not a kid, nor do I have any. But if I did, they'd be prime
    candidates for growing up as retards around here.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 1, 2004
  10. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest

    I'll work on it :)
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  11. Huh? Say what? When did this supposedly happen? Not since I've been a voter
    (that's round about 19-ought-70). They've been the same old slash-n-burn,
    pollute til you puke, laissez faire free marketeers since at least then.

    Now, the Republicans *were* the party of Lincoln, but that's another era ...
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 1, 2004
  12. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest

    EPA was a Nixon Administration initiative, if I remember correctly. And
    as I remember, democrats originally were not exactly environmentally
    minded, they sort became that the same way they became the party of
    civil rights -- serendipitously. Before Reagan, the environment was a
    lot less partisan.
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  13. Michael Scarpitti

    Dana Myers Guest

    I didn't miss actually reading anything, Tom, but I'm disappointed
    to see you're descending into ad-hom attacks. That's just too
    bad.

    Electric cars? Nope. Believe it or not, we've tried that. Purely
    electric cars are currently limited by current technology to
    impracticality for the great majority of American consumers.

    Hybrids, now there's a promising approach, and all of the
    automakers are hard at work to develop and deploy them.
    The Toyota Prius is just the tip of the iceberg; a hybrid
    SUV is in the works as well.
    Our boys are not dying for oil. Our boys are dying so we can securely
    maintain and expand our military presence in the Middle East. The Saudis
    have all but kicked us out and the Turkish aren't terribly cooperative.
    Securing the oil supply in the Middle East is but one benefit (though
    most of the oil imported into the US comes from much closer places
    like Canada and Venezuela). It's not a war for oil, it's a war to
    maintain our international military presence.
    You sure don't take being disagreed with very well.

    Dana
     
    Dana Myers, Jan 1, 2004
  14. Michael Scarpitti

    Dana Myers Guest

    No music pirate ripping a CD is an audiophile, not even a wannabe.
    Currently popular 44KHz CDDA is considered a sub-standard compromise
    by the Goldenears and they get headaches from listening to CDs.

    I haven't heard the Goldenear judgement of newer formats such as
    SuperAudioCD.

    Dana
     
    Dana Myers, Jan 1, 2004
  15. Dana Myers wrote (in part):
    That is a pretty funny question. When painters get together to discuss
    artistic matters, do they ask what brand of canvas, gesso, brushes, ...,
    they use? What solvent to they use to clean their brushes? They might
    mention it, but it is largely unimportant, provided it permits the
    desired results to be achieved.

    Why should photographers have to spend time on this either? What camera,
    what lens, what aperture, what exposure time, what developer, what kind
    of temperature control valve is used to wash prints, whether you mix
    developer from tap water, river water, natural organic vegan spring
    water, distilled water... ?
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jan 1, 2004
  16. Michael Scarpitti

    Dana Myers Guest

    When you become condescending, you effectively admit you've
    run out of reason arguments and instead turn to impeaching
    the speaker. You take a reasoned exchange and turn it into
    a personal attack. You stop thinking and start attacking.
    Nope. But, as much as one might gripe about it, serious
    photography is a niche market generally riding on the back
    of consumer snapshooting. Trends in consumer photography
    directly impact what I'll call "artisan" photography.
    Digital is quite likely the future of photography, but
    I've never suggested that common 2 or 3 MP cameras are
    adequate for the needs for artisan photographers. They're
    certainly not adequate for me.
    My interest is in the darkroom, but the trends outside the darkroom
    impact what takes place inside the darkroom. This thread really started
    when I took exception to the generalization that digitally-stored
    images can not be maintained indefinitely. Now that we've hammered
    on that errant notion long enough, the thread has mutated into a number
    of specious variants intent on impeaching digital photography. Why
    the venom? I think you too realize that what takes place outside
    the darkroom impacts what goes on inside the darkroom, and it's frustrating
    to see the handwriting on the wall. At least, it's frustrating to me.
    But that doesn't cloud my judgement of the objective qualities of
    digital photography.

    Lest my point be unclear - the reason I discuss digital in relation
    to darkroom practice is because digital will impact darkroom practice.
    It arguably already has.
    That's your opinion. Already there are many counter-examples.
    I actually haven't indulged in pinhole photography in 20 years.
    It's quaint fun, but not my cup of tea.
    Here's the rub. Suppose someone develops an artistic method which
    makes use of digital capture, digital manipulation and digital output
    which creates prints imperceptably different from pinhole prints. I
    mean, prints you see hanging on a wall and stop to look and appreciate
    and approve of - without knowing how they were produced. Would you
    no longer appreciate them once you discover they were done with digital?

    [...]
    You need to appreciate that people can and will disagree with you
    for reasons other than not understanding the issue. I simply don't
    agree that one can claim that photography remains viable without
    modern films. Photography didn't fall out of a tree one day,
    film was developed over a period of 250 years working from very basic
    chemical-oriented technologies to more sophisticated manufacturing-
    oriented technologies. As technologies were developed, photographic
    materials were enhanced.

    So, if modern films cease to exist, you have to rewind to
    older means to directly capture images, but if you rewind past
    the 1820s, you won't have a technology to actually capture an
    image. Without a technology to capture an image, photography
    is no longer viable. Period. That's why I disagree with your
    assertion that photography was discovered, not invented. Some
    of the components of photography were discovered (such as silver
    nitrate and the camera obscura) but photography only came
    into being when these components were deliberately combined.

    There's no need to become insulting, I just don't agree
    with you and it's not because I'm ignorant or incapable of
    understanding your point.

    Dana
     
    Dana Myers, Jan 1, 2004
  17. Michael Scarpitti

    John Guest

    Which is only important because of .........

    ................. oil.

    Take away the oil and Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran and all the
    rest are simply 3rd world nations of no particular importance.


    Regards,

    John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
    Please remove the "_" when replying via email
     
    John, Jan 1, 2004
  18. Not bad products. But mediocrity generally rules, i.e., "good enough"
    Mediocrity is the central mass of a population. The one standard deviation
    around the middle containing 68% of the population where everybody gets a
    grade of 'C'.

    In competitive ratings the market leader's product always rate as
    'mediocre'; they are not mediocre in any absolute sense but mediocre
    because they define the mean by being in the majority.

    A successful product can not help but be mediocre. Superior products
    make up 2-3% of the market and so they will always be in a non-competitive
    niche market.

    Real life and real products are graded on a curve, despite the claims
    of today's educators that 'every child excels'.

    If grades are assigned by standard deviations:

    A - 2%
    B - 14%
    C - 68%
    D - 14%
    F - 2%
     
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Jan 1, 2004
  19. Michael Scarpitti

    jjs Guest

    The problem is the township or city. If one did that here, he would have
    such a fine to pay his head would spin.
     
    jjs, Jan 1, 2004
  20. Currently in the US there's the Toyota Prius (midsize), the Honda
    Insight (2-seater), and
    the Honda Civic Hybrid (compact) for available hybrids.

    In Japan, there's also the hybrid Estima (small minivan (MPV?)), and
    the mild-hybrid Crown (large sedan) that have been available for a
    year or two now.

    Planned for release in 2004 in the US are 3 offerings:
    Lexus RX400H (RX330 SUV with a hybrid powertrain):
    http://www.lexus-hybrid.com/
    Toyota Highlander (SUV with a hybrid powertrain):
    http://pressroom.toyota.com/photo_library/display_release.html?id=20031223
    Ford Escape (SUV with a hybrid powertrain):
    http://www.hybridford.com/
     
    Michelle Vadeboncoeur, Jan 1, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.