The disappearance of darkness

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Me, May 7, 2013.

  1. Me

    Me Guest

    Me, May 7, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Me

    RichA Guest

    Film is destined for a small but enthusiastic audience of geeky niche
    players, just like vinyl. Now, vinyl though still a fraction of sales
    of CD's and electronic downloads is growing, but represents only about
    a $70M market in the U.S. Can the film producers (who would also have
    to offer processing or production of chemicals to do it) make a
    business of film, whats left of it and can they survive while film
    continues to fall further?
    Film is where vinyl was around 1985, still dying before its slow rise
    again.
     
    RichA, May 7, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Me

    Me Guest

    I think that was discussed in the podcast. It's relatively inexpensive
    to set up to press vinyl records.
    Not so to set up to produce and process photographic film (except
    monochrome). When the market was massive - there were only a few players
    in that game.
     
    Me, May 7, 2013
    #3
  4. Film is destined for a small but enthusiastic audience of geeky niche
    players, just like vinyl. Now, vinyl though still a fraction of sales
    of CD's and electronic downloads is growing, but represents only about
    a $70M market in the U.S. Can the film producers (who would also have
    to offer processing or production of chemicals to do it) make a
    business of film, whats left of it and can they survive while film
    continues to fall further?
    Film is where vinyl was around 1985, still dying before its slow rise
    again.

    Fair analogy, however at least with a vinyl record you have something that
    is scarcely less convenient than a CD or download.

    Film on the other hand : -

    Is expensive to buy and process. The marginal cost of digital is nil.
    The results can't be seen at the time of filming (other than in hyper
    expensive 70mm movie cameras which video at the same time), but takes a
    while to come back - digital can be viewed immediately and distributed for
    free.
    Is limited to tens of shots per reel. You can get thousands on a micro SD
    card.
    IIRC the resolution of 35mm film is about 12Mp (the same as my phone).
    Current digital resolutions exceed this in a smaller form factor, so in
    future film cameras will be seen a big and cumbersome.

    There might be a bit of nostalgia for vinyl records and even some misplaces
    preference for valve amps, but I doubt many other than Kodak will mourn the
    passing of wet film.
     
    R. Mark Clayton, May 7, 2013
    #4
  5. Me

    Me Guest

    Some of the preference for valve amps isn't misplaced. They're still
    the standard for some instrument amplification (guitars).
    There's also a parallel there with film/digital photography, as digital
    sond processing is used in sound-processing in so-called "modelling
    amps" (solid state) to replicate the "tone" (non-linear response) of
    valve amps. It's a bit like using a "velvia" filter in photoshop etc,
    to replicate the look of film.
     
    Me, May 7, 2013
    #5
  6. Me

    Guest Guest

    Some of the preference for valve amps isn't misplaced. They're still
    the standard for some instrument amplification (guitars).
    There's also a parallel there with film/digital photography, as digital
    sond processing is used in sound-processing in so-called "modelling
    amps" (solid state) to replicate the "tone" (non-linear response) of
    valve amps. It's a bit like using a "velvia" filter in photoshop etc,
    to replicate the look of film.[/QUOTE]

    add distortion for that 'warm tube sound'.

    add grain/noise for that 'film look'. increase saturation for velvia.

    those who want accuracy don't do either.
     
    Guest, May 7, 2013
    #6
  7. Me

    Alan Browne Guest


    The sole advantage tube amps have over transistors is the continuous
    smooth transition of -ve to +ve voltages through the signal range
    whereas transistors have a discontinuity near 0 volts (for both the
    "push" transistor (+ve side) and "pull" (-ve side) of the output in a
    class B amplifier).

    That discontinuity in transistor based circuits is audible to about
    1/1000th of a percent of listeners. IOW, even "audiophiles" <cough>
    with the best trained ears would fail to pick it out in an ABX test.

    Anything related to the "tone" can be done in analog or digital circuits
    - more so in processing.
     
    Alan Browne, May 7, 2013
    #7
  8. Me

    Guest Guest

    which can be done with a transistor amp but is almost never done.

    another factor is the characteristics of the distortion. tube amps are
    less harsh, but who runs their amps where they continually distort?

    under normal conditions, there is no difference that anyone can hear.
    probably less than that.
    yep.
     
    Guest, May 7, 2013
    #8
  9. Me

    PeterN Guest

    add distortion for that 'warm tube sound'.

    add grain/noise for that 'film look'. increase saturation for velvia.

    those who want accuracy don't do either.
    [/QUOTE]

    And those who want art, may do either, neither or both. they may also
    use tons of filters in any of millions of combinations.
     
    PeterN, May 8, 2013
    #9
  10. Uh ... class A versus class B has NOTHING to do with tube versus solid
    state.

    Nothing. Zero.

    In either case NO modern circuit comes even close to class B.

    Doug McDonald
     
    Doug McDonald, May 8, 2013
    #10
  11. Me

    Me Guest

    DSP is used in "modelling amps" which attempt to replicate the waveform
    of over-driven valve amps combined with particular guitar speaker
    non-linearity and "break-up" characteristics.
    They are getting pretty good - in blind tests, it's hard to tell, ie
    between a Vox AC30, and a Vox modelling amp set to sound like a Vox AC 30.
    But I think you'll find that professional performers almost unanimously
    use valve amps that they favour - I doubt that Eric Clapton for example
    would have much real interest in performing with a modelling (DSP) amp
    on which he can flick a knob to change tone to sound like Joe Satriani's
    setup one minute, Stevie Ray Vaughn the next, then flick back to the
    Eric Clapton setup DSP preset.
     
    Me, May 8, 2013
    #11
  12. Me

    Trevor Guest

    Actually there are plenty who still favour real B&W film and papers to what
    can be printed from digital. And far more who think the archival qualities
    are superior to digital at the moment. That may change, but the nostalgia
    won't. Even though there is *nothing* superior about vinyl, many still
    prefer the ritual. And many will still get a kick out of watching an image
    appear under the safelight. (for as long as they can get paper and chemicals
    anyway!)

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, May 8, 2013
    #12
  13. Me

    Guest Guest

    Actually there are plenty who still favour real B&W film and papers to what
    can be printed from digital.[/QUOTE]

    for no good reason.

    anything that can be done with film and paper can be done with digital
    a whole lot better, and the old look can be emulated if that's really
    what they want.

    the only people who prefer film are those who refuse to accept new
    technology.
    those who do are very mistaken.

    with digital, you can make unlimited perfect copies forever. with
    analog you cannot. every 'backup' (which isn't a backup at all) is
    lossy.

    with offsite backups, you won't lose any images if your house burns
    down. there's an identical copy elsewhere. the more offsite backups,
    the better.

    plus, as computers and software improves, so do the images. for
    instance, noise reduction gets better, so those old images taken with
    what are now considered noisy sensors look better than they did before.
    the only thing that will change is that those who think film is more
    archival realize they are mistaken.

    digital is and will always be more archival.
    it will when those who are nostalgic move on to the great darkroom in
    the sky.
    digital could be configured to stop every 20 minutes to 'flip' the
    record, and maybe put a motion sensor in the floor so if you dance to
    the music a bit too enthusiastically, the record skips.

    the only good thing about vinyl is the cover art was 12" and not 5".
    that can be emulated digitally.
     
    Guest, May 8, 2013
    #13
  14. You would not drape a lace curtain in front of an old master.
     
    R. Mark Clayton, May 8, 2013
    #14
  15. Well class B is a very old design, I remember reading about it as a kid in
    th sixties, OTOH you can do class B using transistors.
     
    R. Mark Clayton, May 8, 2013
    #15
  16. Doh! you normally bias transistors, so it doesn't go -10V to +10V, but +5V
    to +25V.

    Valve amps do demonstate tonality and high [thermal] noise.

    Transistors were adopted in amps (and much else) because they outperformed
    valves on linearity / distortion, frequency response, reliability, noise,
    size, energy consumption and last but by no means least cost.

    Example - a basic EF81 (AF valve) was over £1 retail in 1973, when they were
    still in mass production - that is about £11 ($16) today. Even now an
    equivalent transistor would cost less than a dollar and out perform it in
    every way.


    but has never actually done it.
    OTOH a Brit can do it standing up...
     
    R. Mark Clayton, May 8, 2013
    #16
  17. Me

    Whisky-dave Guest

    Other than it's not repeatable as easily as digital is, part of the charm is having to get it right. I have say 12 shots on 120 film to get what you want is rather more challenging than taking 5,000 inages on a 16GB card and sifting through them for the 'best'.

    I remmber doing solarization in a darkroom, it felt liek I was actually achiving something special, I don't get that filing by going to a filter menu,it hardley seems like doing nowadays.

    I miss the taste of hypo when I used to syphon it back from the tray to the bottle, not forgetting the smell of processing cibrachrome in a drum and the excitment of adding the neutralizing chemcal to make the it 'safe' to pour down the sink.

    Which in some way is a shame, but at least with digital we can all have themona lisa hanging in our toilet, whether thats a good thing on not I'm notsure.

    Sometimes what makes a thing worth while is it uniqueness and individuality..

    Images maybe but does the actual content.



    it would have to be semi-random as not every album needed flipping after 20mins.
    Equally you can;t throw a MP3 away in distgust, but I've broken a few records before. Ypou couild simulate it but it's not quite the same.
    You'll also miss the terms like a "broken record or skipping.
    for me digital art is measure in teh number of bytes the end, youm also forgot about gatefold and shapped and coloured vinyl. I doubt MP3 will ever have any real value or raratuy maybe that's a good thing.


    I want to get rid of this old style digital technology and replace it with bio-feedback circutry, we won't need cameras then of cards just imagine the picture you want and you'll be able to see it, no need to print it out oreven project it.

    Personally I can't wait for holodeck technology, but I guess they be those still wanting 'real sex' ;-)
     
    Whisky-dave, May 8, 2013
    #17
  18. Me

    Me Guest

    Some still are in mass production - perhaps just not in the kind of
    volume as 50 years ago, ie:
    http://www.jj-electronic.com/
    There are also makers in Russia and China.It's moved on a bit recently too, with class D amps setting efficiency
    standards, increased efficiency means less heat, smaller size. For large
    concert PA systems - this type of audio amp may be used these days:
    http://www.powersoft-audio.com/en/products/touring-amplifiers/k-series/k20.html
    2 x 9000w in a small rack mount unit, 12kg weight.
    (but you can almost guarantee that the guitarist will still be using his
    valve amp, miked in to the PA)
     
    Me, May 8, 2013
    #18
  19. Count me as a guitarist who thinks said preference is misplaced. I've owned
    a lot of amps, tube and solid state, and the tube amps have all been noisy,
    ugly of sound, heavy, and a pain in the butt. Of course, I'm into a clean
    sound and my "effects chain" consists of just a single cable between guitar
    and amp. The folks who hate the sound of their guitar (i.e. use effects) and
    love ugly sounds like tube amps.

    The cabinets and speakers used are way more important than the amplifier.
    But there aren't a lot of other guitarists with degrees in EE. (One place I
    play has a solid state pedal steel guitar amp with a 15" speaker; my guitar
    (a hand-made Gibson L-4 equivalent) sounds insanely wonderful through it,
    despite the player.)
    Yes. But as of this month, Fujifilm is still making film (including both
    Velvia 50 and Velvia 100), and has even released a new ISO 400 color
    negative film.
     
    David J. Littleboy, May 8, 2013
    #19
  20. Me

    PeterN Guest

    for no good reason.

    anything that can be done with film and paper can be done with digital
    a whole lot better, and the old look can be emulated if that's really
    what they want.

    the only people who prefer film are those who refuse to accept new
    technology.[/QUOTE]


    I would be happy to introduce you to some who would easily demonstrate
    the gross inaccuracy of your statement.
     
    PeterN, May 8, 2013
    #20
    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.