Text 49639, 84 rader
Skriven 2008-10-04 12:04:00 av JAY EMRIE (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av JEFF GUERDAT
Ärende: Re: Nice sharp pixes.
=============================
JG>> JG>A big reason for Kodachrome disappearing is that it's a NASTY process
JG>> JG>(don't stick you hands in the chemicals and certainly don't dump them
JG>> JG>down the sink).  Ektachrome, or, at least, the E6 process, will
probably
JG>> JG>be around for quite some time, just as the C41 color negative process
JG>> JG>will exist.
JG>>
JG>> No, the big reason for Kodachrome disappearing is the dramatic drop in
JG>> the usage of Kodachrome. I would bet that E6 has, or will very soon,
JG>> follow the same route.

JG>There was never a large number of labs (comparatively speaking) that
JG>handled Kodachrome because of the proprietary nature, the difficulty of
JG>the process and the issues of the chemistry.  When the first E4 (and
JG>then E6) Ektachrome films and processes hit, the writing was on the
JG>wall.  Kodachrome is deemed superior in image quality by many but, when
JG>given the option, many chose otherwise.  Whether any film process will
JG>have an enduring fate remains to be seen.  Certainly on the amateur
JG>level, digital is replacing it and pros are at least making use of it,
JG>even many of th ehard-core film advocates.

I know nothing of other locales, but here the pros are embracing digital
so much so that some of the better photolabs have gone out of business.
One, my favorite, now does little else other than printing mostly for
wedding photographers and school class photographers.

JG>> Regards to Kodachrome - why would professional photo stay with
chrome JG>> when they can get the same - maybe better - results from
digital? They JG>> can, also if they desire, bypass using a professional
photo lab except JG>> for the printing process when they want to use
their time otherwise or JG>> even do that themselves.

JG>It's not true that digital represents the same quality as film, at
JG>least, not if you're after ultimate quality.  The dynamic (contrast)
JG>range of many/most/all(?) sensors is lacking compared to what can be
JG>done with film.  The pixel count has finally gotten to the point of
JG>matching film's resolution but that's not the whole picture (get it? ;)
JG>).  Yes, the immediate gratification of digital is unique but there's
JG>still a lot of manipulation that may need to be done that now requires
JG>time, effort, expertise and money spent on the computer and software.
JG>It's shifted the process and not all photographers have the desire or
JG>ability to do this.  So, while the digital camera is getting better,
JG>quality-wise, it still has a way to go as does the professional
JG>photographer's use and desire.



JG>> Now lets look at it from a logical view point. In my Camera Club only a
JG>> very few (5-6 or so) still use film (all types). Virtually all have
JG>> switched to digital. The ones going to digital FIRST were the members
JG>> that were doing professional work also.

JG>Some people see the future and embrace it immediately.  Others wait
JG>until it's actually a viable alternative.  I've found digital
JG>photography to be a blessing (and a curse on occasion).  Others have
JG>found that digital doesn't serve their needs well and are still waiting.
JG>  Does that put them behind the 8 ball?  They're still making a living
JG>and doing well...

I do not have the occasion to attend many doings that use professional
photographers, but the ones I do attend seems to attract digital
photogs.

No, digital hasn't totally replaced film---yet---but that time is not
in the too distant future. And these gadgets (computers & printers) we
play with daily are hastening that time.

Jay

P.S.

On another area. Printers are suffering from the proliferation of
computers. Example. They no longer get near the business they used to
get publishing weekly, monthly news letters and other documents since
computers have become so ubiquitous now the majority of such is emailed
to the recipients rather than snail mailed. Virtually all of them
encourage customers to email products to them to be printed.

Jay


---
 þ OLXWin 1.00a þ A backward poet writes inverse
 * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)