[rollei_list] Re: age old "digital vs film" debate...again...was RE: OT Ancient Computers
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 06:54:45 -0800
No, I just do not use DVDs any longer. Just a large HD and a back up second
drive.
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Douglas Nygren <dnygr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm sure you do this every day.
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2009, at 9:20 PM, Peter K. wrote:
>
> You would transfer the images to a newer media. Simple. Few retain imags
>> in DVD these days anyway.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Shannon Hong <triode12@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The other problem with Digital data is storage.
>>> Computer storage technology keeps evolving, standards/formats keep
>>> changing. CDs and DVDs don't last forever especially the recordable kind
>>> (Dyes fade, storage devices fail/become obsolete). HDD spindles wear out and
>>> fail over time. Even digital data is prone to corruption. Multiple copies
>>> should be made and stored on separate sets of media to ensure that you have
>>> redundancy.
>>>
>>> One has to keep transferring the data to newer storage mediums and if
>>> you have a lot of data this may or may not be a PITA. While one needs to
>>> store film well, once you have done so, you don't have to do the above every
>>> 5 yrs or so.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:47:51 -0800
>>> From: genej2ster@xxxxxxxxx
>>> To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: age old "digital vs film"
>>> debate...again...was RE: OT Ancient Computers
>>>
>>>
>>> On reflection, there ARE a lot of ways in which digital cameras have
>>> become superior to film cameras. Convenience and operating cost are 2. No
>>> way I could provide my local ballet company with 1000 exposures of a
>>> performance on film. Neither they nor I could afford it. And the
>>> resolution and total visual information on a good 10-plus Mpixel camera can
>>> be very high. I did a 40 inch tall poster that looked really nice. I am
>>> probably going to buy a 5D Mk2 here pretty soon because it is such a
>>> powerful tool for these kinds of things. I will not be giving up my film
>>> cameras though; and it is not just because I am so sentimental about the
>>> medium. I really do find the response curve of digital sensors to be
>>> significantly inferior to film as of my Rebel Xsi or my buddy's 5D. Not
>>> even close really. The transition to shadow or highlight is so much
>>> smoother and more beautiful on film to my eye. Everyone who looks at the
>>> prints notices it. The 5d MK2 is supposed to be better. I will
>>> reserve judgement. In any case, I have no doubt, the gap will continue to
>>> narrow, and one day I WILL be using film because I just love working with it
>>> and my old cameras, enlargers, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Frank Dernie <
>>> Frank.Dernie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On the contrary, Frank, I believe both statements to be true. In all my
>>>> recent experience digital -is- in all practical ways superior to film. OTOH
>>>> it is a matter of personal choice so if somebody wants to use film that is
>>>> fine by me :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 13 Jan, 2009, at 16:46, Eric Goldstein wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Frank, glad to read this much more reasonable and modest statement
>>>>> about digital's capabilities, and your own personal abilities and
>>>>> tastes, in contrast to this earlier statement:
>>>>>
>>>>> In all practical ways digital has exceeded the capability of film for
>>>>>> some time. Certainly if there is an
>>>>>> effect which one wishes to achieve, using a vintage LF lens for
>>>>>> example, film may have to be the
>>>>>> choice but that does not make film better, just an appropriate choice
>>>>>> in some circumstances.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Eric Goldstein
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Frank Dernie
>>>>> <Frank.Dernie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I quite agree, a matter of personal choice. I get p*ssed off when
>>>>>> people say
>>>>>> it meeds 67, or choose any other number, megapixels for digital to
>>>>>> match
>>>>>> film which is patently ridiculous. Which film? what other parameter
>>>>>> than
>>>>>> resolution?
>>>>>> I get better dynamic range, a smoother look and plenty of resolution
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> digital. My prints look more 3 dimensional and real - particularly
>>>>>> skin
>>>>>> tones. I still like the look of B&W film for portraits, actually, but
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> for anything else.
>>>>>> Some photographers prefer film so for them it is better, obviously.
>>>>>> best regards,
>>>>>> Frank
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 13 Jan, 2009, at 13:56, austin.franklin@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But that doesn't mitigate that the other works "better" for others,
>>>>>>> and no
>>>>>>> amount of discussion is going to change that. Even if it is as
>>>>>>> simple as
>>>>>>> someone likes to use a particular camera, that's good enough IMO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>> Rollei List
>>>>>
>>>>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>
>>>>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>>>>> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>>>>
>>>>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>>>>> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
>>>>> www.freelists.org
>>>>>
>>>>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>>>>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Rollei List
>>>>
>>>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'in the
>>>> subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>>>
>>>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with'unsubscribe' in
>>>> the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>>>
>>>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>>>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Be Just and Fear Not
>>>
>>> Download free emoticons today! Holiday cheer from Messenger.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Peter K
>> Ó¿Õ¬
>>
>
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the
> subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in
> the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
--
Peter K
Ó¿Õ¬
Other related posts:
