Kodak on digital and film future

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

  1. Michael Scarpitti

    jjs Guest

    You put your finger on the problem: American _consumers_. Perhaps it is
    time to concatenate that word: Americanconsumers, and replace "voter" with
    the word. Don't most Americanconsumers vote with their wallet, or
    something in the vicinity?

    American society by its very physical layout has been a consequence of the
    automobile and cheap petrol. Look to many European civilizations for
    alternatives which function perfectly well without the same.

    The electric car is not the issue. The issue is lack of alternatives to
    the automobile itself: adequate, honorable, good public transportation,
    delivery services, rational city and country layouts that naturally emerge
    from a rational distribution of a scarce and dangerious resorce: petrol.

    Petrol is priced artificially low in America. Period. Americans pay a lot
    money in terms other than gasoline taxes to subsidize the political
    protection racket neccesssary to protect oil overseas to make that fuel
    source cheap here.
     
    jjs, Jan 1, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Michael Scarpitti

    jjs Guest

    Which reminds me of the question; What is the difference between a C grade
    at Harvard and a C grade at a public university? Answer: At the public
    university, one has to _work_ for a C.
     
    jjs, Jan 1, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hmmm, when I read this I picture you fitting right in with, say, Norway -
    living a a gingerbread chalet 5 miles from town, uphill both ways, and
    skiing to work... You would be photogenic if nothing else..

    Denny - 5,000# FWD truck with a gun rack in the rear window and an airplane
    with TWO engines...
     
    Dennis O'Connor, Jan 1, 2004
  4. This has been discussed at length before... Put a plastic bag in a pail...
    Pour the old fixer into the bag and set it out to evaporate the water down
    to powder.. Put the powder into an old paint can... By the time you are a
    digital convert the can of powder can then be dropped off where ever old
    paint buckets and solvents go in your town...
    Denny
     
    Dennis O'Connor, Jan 1, 2004
  5. Darn, I missed that one... No wonder my pictures suck...


    natural organic vegan spring water
     
    Dennis O'Connor, Jan 1, 2004
  6. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest

    It's only your opinion that I'm being condescending. I don't think
    calling crap "crap" is condescending. I think I'm being honest :) I
    don't think noting the difference between what snapshooters typically do
    and what serious artists, amateurs, or professionals do is
    condescending. Opinionated maybe, but that's what this forum is about,
    opinion. And I'm not going to tread softly on Usenet...

    I've been making prints for a long time. I know how to make a good
    print. Machine prints are machine prints, whether photochemical or
    digital and IMO they're crap. Now, maybe my opinions get bit boorish
    (and whose don't after too long an argument that is simply getting
    repetative...) Vis-a-vis, when I show my clients or potential clients
    the *quality* of the large format work and custom prints I myself make,
    rather than the usual mediocre, cheesey, machine print they previously
    thought was "good" from their 35mm or digital snapshots from the amateur
    lab they've used, well suffice it to say I don't have even use any
    boorish adjective at all. It's plainly obvious.
    Nonsense Dana. Serious photography is what does and always has driven
    consumer amateur photography. Snapshooting consumers see, admire, and
    try to imitate the work they see everyday in mass media done by
    professionals and artists. It's where all photographic insiration comes
    from -- viewing the work of others.

    If you don't think so, go out and take some snapshots of anything and
    see if any magazine, ad agency, gallery, or any other forum using
    photography will actually publish imitative, mediocre snapshots or hang
    them for all the world to see and be inspired by. Won't happen. *ALL*
    the mass media images you, I, or anyone else sees in galleries,
    magazines, advertisements, postcards, calendars, posters, movies, T.V.,
    etc. etc., are "serious" images taken and produced by serious
    photogrpahers who either get paid to make serious professional images or
    do it for artistic reasons.

    When the typical consumer see what photography is capable of (i.e.,
    Ansel Adams or Richard Avedon), they also want to engage the medium
    whether it's amateur photo night at the local high school or snapshots
    of grandma and grandpa's 50th wedding anniversary. Since I've taught
    photography to many amateur students, I know this is true.

    Digital is an entirely different imaging medium. Sooner or later not
    even the deliberate mass marketing of digital as "equal" to or "better"
    than film imaging will be able to hide and obfuscate that fact. They
    have different imaging abilities and different applications and always will.
    To a certian extent, that may be true. The point is photochemical
    imaging and artistry isn't dependent on mass market consumerism, as I've
    patiently tried to explain. If Kodak discontinued all their films
    tomorrow, it would survive and thrive.

    The fact is, professional photographers and artists alike know it's both
    a fallacy and suicide to trust their legacy of images to digital and is
    why the majority insist on shooting film. The professional lab I've used
    for years has almost gone completely digital. But 99% of all the work
    they output on digital is on film, whether amateur or professional.

    That's a fact.
    And they can't. Not with any assuredness. It's the difference between
    holding a real, tangible work of art in your hands you *know* you can
    preserve or only having it as stored data on an even more fragile
    electronic device that is subject to the ups and downs of technology and
    mass market consumerism.
    Apparently not long enough, since you don't get it.
    Digital doesn't need to be impeached, simply acknowledge it's a
    different medium with useful but different applications in the world of
    imaging. It cannot do what film does, nor can optical photochemical
    processes do some useful things digital does. The *problem* is in order
    to make as much short term profit as they can, digital marketers and
    manufacturers are piggy backing their medium on the established
    photography market. They appropriate familar photographic terms and
    package digital cameras in familiar SLR type bodies, but then obfuscate
    the factual differences bewteen the mediums. When, pray tell, have you
    ever been honestly informed by the manufacturers and marketers of
    digital cameras of the Nyquist limitations (resolution) that plague and
    will always plague digital lenses and sensors? This is a serious issue
    consumers have yet to be told anything about. I have read fallacy after
    fallacy of how digital is "superior" to film. It is, in fact, *DIGITAL*
    that has made it's way in the world by fallaciously and speciously
    impreaching the unique attributes of film imaging -- imaging abilities
    digital cannot actually perform. The physics simply don't allow it. But
    they don't tell consumers that; all they do is lie.

    When people realize that they're not getting the same thing as they get
    with film, including the permanance of a typical photochemical image,
    they will relegate digital to it's proper place in imaging for those
    applications it's inherently suited for. This has already happend on a
    number of prominant occasions, such as when (relying on the utter B.S.
    Henry Wilhelm keeps spouting for digital media longevity on behalf the
    digital industry) the claimed "archival permanance" of Epson inkjet
    papers and inks was discovered by the public to be a load of crap -- the
    pictures output on them fading in months. The result has been several
    prominant articles informing people they need to put their images on a
    "safe" medium -- like traditional photochemical prints or on film.

    Frankly, Dana, you just don't seem to be very well informed on this issue.
    In fact (and I've done a fair amount of research into this...)
    traditional photography and darkroom is *growing*. Particularly in
    larger formats. It's not growing as fast as consumer digital, but in
    fact consumer digital is essentially a gadget oriented market. A fad. It
    won't grow at leaps and bounds forever; it'll reach an equilibrium. The
    same thing happeded when George Eastman introduced the Brownie cameras.
    All it did was encourage new interest in, and new markets for, mass
    consumer photography. But it didn't impact traditional serious
    photography in any meaningful way. If anything, it encouraged the new
    era of "snapshooters" to try to imitate serious photography.

    The only serious areas where digital has had any real impact is in those
    areas where digital has a valid and useful application -- publishing.
    News photographers and jouranalists shoot digital *only* because the
    nature of their particular medium is suited to it, i.e., the ability to
    transmit a newsworthy images from the event location to the editor
    immediately. Timing is everything in news media.


    Anmyway I somply can't continue to respond at length. So I'll have to
    snip the rest.
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  7. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest


    Ha! Is that the kind you buy in the store where the naturally occuring
    microscopic critters have been "sterilized," and filtered or do they go
    out and drill their own wells!
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  8. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest

    But I don't resort to specious analogies that actually prove my point!
    And why is that? If there was no oil there, we'd have little interest in
    the middle east other than Israel. Two well known oil industry synonyms: Bush/Cheney.
    Bull (sorry, I call 'em as I see 'em.) What Bush has done is *lessen*
    our effective military presense in the rest of the world (we have a
    small, volunteer army, ya know...) and increased the threat of terrorism
    by shifting our military focus from the war on terrorism to engage in an
    **unconstitutional** war against a pint sized murdering dictator -- who
    was a bad man the UN should have dealt with -- but not a threat to any
    US interests.

    Bush/Cheney = oil/oil. Government by corporation is the Bush/Cheney motto.

    I have little patience for nonsense, I guess :)
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  9. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest

    What -- no Subaru?
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  10. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest

    Actually I am norwegian :) (but drive a subaru. no gun rack. I could
    maybe mount a bazooka on the top cargo rack...)
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  11. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest

    Mediocrity defined mathematically (statistically) Very informatical.
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  12. You must drill your own well, of course. You cannot be an artist by
    purchasing it ready-made. That prevents the hand of the artist from
    showing. The microscopic critters must not be sterilized: they provide
    life to the image that sterilized ones cannot, just like in Yogourt.

    I assume you coat your own plates using an emulsion of your own design.
    You need not mine your own silver, but you should certainly make your
    own silver nitrate by dissolving the silver in nitric acid. This
    provides the secret artistic touch that the celestially high art
    photographers use. It was a closely guarded secret until now.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jan 1, 2004
  13. Michael Scarpitti

    Tom Phillips Guest

    shhhhh....
     
    Tom Phillips, Jan 1, 2004
  14. Sounds good. Just one question: how long does it take to evaporate, say, a
    couple-three gallons of fixer this way? Does stuff grow in it? Could your kids
    use it as a science experiment?
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 2, 2004
  15. Actually, Oakland has a *very* aggressive anti-dumping effort going on,
    complete with billboards and staff. The problem is (besides the city being
    practically broke), it's difficult to impossible to catch the motherfuckers
    who dump this stuff. (That term is actually too mild for these people, who
    have a special section of Hell reserved for them.) Around the corner from
    where I live is a place where they might as well just put up a sign--"CITY
    DUMP ANNEX: NO FEES! DUMP WHATEVER YOU LIKE!". I've seen everthing here: just
    in the last month, a cast-iron bathtub in the middle of the street, a deli
    refrigerator, stoves, a pickup truck on blocks, plus a brand-new SUV (stolen)
    that someone abandoned--and then set on fire! (Charred a utility pole and damn
    near burned down the adjacent building.) For that last one, I'm only sorry I
    didn't have my camera to get what would have been a great shot of the firemen
    hosing it down in the middle of the night.

    Plus there are hefty fines (> $1,000 for the first offense). They actually did
    catch someone there a few months ago by doing a stakeout and calling in the
    police, but that's the only way they'll ever catch these sons of bitches.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 2, 2004
  16. Depends where you live, in NM maybe a couple of days. Here on the East coast
    you might try using a black 55 drum with a upside down pipe on the top
    which lets water vapor out, and keeps rain water out.
     
    Gregory W Blank, Jan 2, 2004
  17. Not much will grow in it...
    The kids can't really hurt themselves...
    Evaporation time depends on temperature, humidity, etc... A shallow tray
    will evaporate faster than a deep bucket, etc...
    When I rattle these 'solutions' off I tend to forget about people who live
    in crowded city conditions, where it may not be practical...
    Denny
     
    Dennis O'Connor, Jan 2, 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.