Is Al Kaplan going Digital?

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by al_kaplan|1, Feb 2, 2005.

  1. This morning I received the February issue of The Big Picture in the
    mail, a trade journal for the digital printing industry that I've
    been getting for a bunch of years. The cover announced the lead
    article The Secret World of Black & White Photography and inside were
    some quotes by a number of photographers about how they used digital
    for B&W including "fine art prints". A lot of people still appear to
    be using film and scanning it!

    In an article on digital cameras it shows and talks about the new
    Leica with digital back. (This keeps things on topic.)

    Since it isn't catering to a bunch of amateurs the magazine is quite
    upfront about the fact that a typical amateur camera might give you
    only 30,000 to 40,000 exposures before needing repair while a pro
    camera can be expected to last 100,000 to 150,000 exposures between
    service stops (page 44). Also mentioned is the fact that buying the
    most expensive high end camera is only cost effective if you can
    recoup your investment and expense it it in one year. It says
    technology is changing too fast to figure on depreciating it over a
    multi-year amortization schedule.

    This is a magazine that features ads and new product reviews of
    things like $30,000 medium format scanners for you Mamiya and
    Hasselblad folks, printers that take 100 ft. rolls of 60 inch wide
    paper or vinyl, knocking out prints at rates up to 1,750 square feet
    an hour. They cater to companies with accountants, and often stock
    holders, concerned with the bottom line so I'm more likely to believe
    their articles than what I read in consumer photo magazines.

    To answer the question in the title: Not Yet, but I do keep up with
    the technology a lot more than some of you guys could ever imagine.
     
  2. "Is Al Kaplan going Digital?"

    If the answer is "yes," then I guess hell just froze over(!)
     
  3. Well... then, if Al Kaplan goes digital, he'll have more time to play with his film gear. Won't he?
     
  4. maybe, but far more trobling is the fact that al kaplan is starting to refer to himself in the 3rd person.

    a reality show, late night chat program, and/or workplace massacre can't be too far off now.
     
  5. you might wanna try using one some day instead if just spouting abstract ideas all the time.....get rid of the books, get off your strabux chair and go rent one for a day instead of buying that carton of cigs with your social security checks.... ;-)
     
  6. It was just for the title, Roger. I've spent too many years writing/editing where that would be normal format for a title.
     
  7. gib

    gib

    wj gibson wonders how many Leica forum Leica owners have taken 30,000 to 40,000 photos or let's say 1000 36x rolls of film.

    wj gibson also wonders at the cost recovery vs. relentless technical improvement. he was asked to consult with a small local museum as to what camera (digital) to use to photograph collection acquisition items (2d and 3d). The analysis spun out when the workflow analysis bumped up against how many photographic or scanner images the museum might make in two years time vs. obsolescence of the equipment. If they could only make 2000 images from someone working part time, was it worth it to go digital. They are still mulling it over. Some kind of mix of film, digital camera, or scanner (they get offered the chance to copy photos and photo post cards from the 19th century,but the original are not donated). They have some old camera gear 8x10 or larger, that I have suggested they use for certain select objects.
     
  8. fwiw, ive had to cla my leicas far more often than ive ever had to send out my digitals, which i use a lot more. leicas are well made, but are by no means impervious to the elements when being used everyday.
     
  9. This is the disposable generation. When your digital camera wears out, breaks down or becomes obsolete, you get a new one with improved features. When your 1960 M3 cranks out you send it to Sherry Krauter who overhauls it... and then it's good again.
     
  10. buying the most expensive high end camera is only cost effective if you can recoup your investment and expense it it in one year.​

    How precisely is this relevant to the 99% of people here, yourself included, who don't make a living from photography, and werent' considering an $8,000 EOS 1D//?
    Sheesh, when I first saw the subject header I thought Al finally got a microwave.
     
  11. BTW, does someone have Tony'e e-mail address. I think we should report this guys who's impersonating Al Kaplan. ;>)
     
  12. My D70 has already paid for itself in much less than a year. Approx 80 good quality films at UK prices + dev + printing + CD at good lab = Cost of new D70 & 18-70mm lens even back when I bought it. Now the equation would be about 60 films! I hasten to say again, at UK prices. Your equation will be different.

    However buying a DSLR is not only an economic decision (unless you are a busy pro) it was a learning curve and it is fun and gives me a LOT of extra time even allowing for the computer time with photoshop.

    Keeping up with technology also means using that technology, learning what it will do well and what it won't and exploring/enjoying/exploiting what it can do that older technology cannot. Reading about it is not enough.

    I am enjoying a new approach with film (rangefinder + Leica lens) and digital togther. The neg scanner is arriving next week in order to further what I do with film.
     
  13. "Is Al Kaplan going Digital?"

    Do pigs fly?
     
  14. leicas are like shovels. the technology doesnt change. when you buy into other things where the technology changes, you update. are you still using the first computer you ever bought dennis? what about the first car you ever bought? its not that one is better or worse than the other, its about technology.
     
  15. "Also mentioned is the fact that buying the most expensive high end camera is only cost effective if you can recoup your investment and expense it it in one year. It says technology is changing too fast to figure on depreciating it over a multi-year amortization schedule."

    As a former owner of a large business with an accounting background myself, here's the deal: it isn't technology or equipment manufacturers who dictate how something can be depreciated, it's the IRS. I'm not sure if the numbers have gone up but as of a couple years ago you could write off a single purchase up to $15000 in the year of aquisition. Assuming you had $15000 of income to write it off against. Beyond that, the tax code was quite clear in how short a time period you could write off various things. I do remember that computer equipment had a shorter span, but nowhere as short as their typical 18-month product lifecycle. But all that aside, basing equipment purchases solely on allowable depreciation is not the way I'd ever manage a business. If I were a commercial photographer making large prints or shooting sporting events (for example), then a less expensive low-end DLSR would probably not be the best purchase.
     
  16. Al, do us a favor and start posting pictures. We don't care if they are digital or not. In summation: We would like Al Kaplan to go out and shoot some pictures and be able to present them in digital format on this forum.

    P.S. Those environmental self portraits freak me out even more but hey what do I know.
     
  17. maybe, but far more troubling is the fact that al kaplan is starting to refer to himself in the 3rd person.
    Actually, referring to oneself in the third person is in fact proper. It is generally reserved for more formal styles of writing i.e. MLA, Turabian or APA rather than forums, email, et. al., so it just seems out of place.
     
  18. "are you still using the first computer you ever bought dennis? what about the first car you ever bought?"

    Uhh... that was point exactly. People don't keep things as long as they once did. But you're right .. opart of the reason is rapidly changing technology.

    It used to be that when a part on your car broke they would repair or replace the broken componenet. Now they toss out the whole part and put in a new one. It's a modular approach. It's a disposable mentality. I'm not saying it's good or bad... it just is what it is.

    Things aren't made as durable as they used to be and don't last as long either. Unless it's in times of economic crunch people don't keep their cars as long as they used to. Al knows what I'm talking about, I'd bet... probabaly better.

    I'm not saying it's good or bad to keep a Leica for a lifetime. Some people do. I'm helping a young photographer sell some of her grandfather's Leica equipment right now. He bought the stuff right after WWII. Some people still use 40, 50, 60 year old Leicas today and get them fixed when they need it rather than buying a new camera. It's just a different mindset. I'm not saying that's either good or bad... it just is what is.
     
  19. Why not?
    If the price is right and the result is acceptable why not?
     
  20. Well Al, since you obviously have a computer to e-mail from, you could just try a small handheld digicam just for fun. Using a digital camera doesn't mean that you have to give up using film, so there's no need to make any painful sacrifices or anything like that.
     
  21. Um, I haven't banged out 1000 rolls, but I'm pretty well on my way. In the last ten months of last year, I probably exposed around 150 rolls of black and white film. Less color, but in the dozens of rolls. And I've been pretty laid up sick since September or so :) Burning film is easy. Just spend an afternoon with the family or wandering around the fish market with a camera. Or whatever.
     
  22. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    People don't keep things as long as they once did...Unless it's in times of economic crunch people don't keep their cars as long as they used to.
    People keep cars longer. From 1992 to 2002, the average age of the car owned in the US increased by 20% (Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Department of Transportation, U.S. Government), by no means insignificant. Here is the exact quote: Because of improvements in the longevity of passenger cars, the median age of the automobile fleet in the United States has increased significantly, from 7.0 years in 1992 to 8.4 years in 2002. Note that most of the this time hardly qualifies as "economic crunch," quote the opposite. Facts are always best when they're really facts.
     
  23. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    "quite the opposite."
     
  24. What's next, Al, a flush toilet?

    By the I'm done with my DSLR, Canon will have their line of digital retina implants ready, anyway. In the future, only old-timers like you will even carry a "camera" anymore.
     
  25. I'm planning on keeping my pickup truck indefinitely. 'Course, in order to get rid of it, I'd probably have to get it started.
     
  26. Grant said:"leicas are like shovels. the technology doesnt change. when you buy into other things where the technology changes, you update. are you still using the first computer you ever bought dennis? what about the first car you ever bought? its not that one is better or worse than the other, its about technology."

    I don't buy the argument that it is about technology. It is about making pictures. If you enjoy doing it with a shovel then be it. There are guys who can make much better wood carvings with a chainsaw than I could ever do with anything technologically advanced machines.
     
  27. "the median age of the automobile fleet in the United States has increased significantly, from 7.0 years in 1992 to 8.4 years in 2002."

    Perhaps in the hands of second and third owners...
     
  28. rene, go try to shoot for sports illustrated with a leica M...sometimes technology does matter, and is necessary....like it or not...
     
  29. Yeah, those poor sports photographers suffer with their dim viewfinders, confusing knobs, wheels and buttons and lousy autofocus. Just think what they could do with a rangefinder!
     
  30. Al, when you start to believe your own publicity, it's the beginning of the end. . .we'll discuss over lunch later this month.
    00B0Dg-21688784.jpg
     
  31. Rolffe wrote
    "Is Al Kaplan going Digital?"

    Do pigs fly?


    From RFC 1925 (The 12 Networking truths):
    (3) With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.


    And back to the article Al cited. Reaching 30,000 or more shutter actuations with a dSLR is much easier than with a film camera. One just shoots much more as with a film camera. Most people who experienced failed shutters on their D30s never shot as much with their Elan 7s.

    Professionaly used cameras see more use, but even there you have a difference between digital and film. Who shoots a whole roll in a burst except maybe sports photographers?
    And then to depreciation, don't know about the US, but in germany you have to depreciate your equipment as adviced by the internal revenue. In case of "technical change" you can depreciate your equipment to zero in an instant.
    Let's assume I bought a Canon 1ds in 2003 and depreciate it acording to the rules over five years. Then it was in my books with a value of roughly 6000 Euro last year. Then I bought a 1DS MkII in december and depreciate my 1DS to a symbolic value of 1 Euro in my books. I reduce my taxable income by 6000 Euro and save some 200 Euro taxes.
    This makes sense if you earn (enough) money with your equipment, if not you'll try to retain a higher value to get a better credit rating and you'll probably don't buy another body :)
    In any case, it makes sense to expect this kind of equipment to be less competetive in a shorter period and if you depend on it to earn a living you better earn enough money to get the next big thing every two or three years. This does not mean, that you don't get any use out of your old camera. It still does what it was intended to do.
    I know more than one photographer with a D60 as backup to a 1D and that as backup to a 1D MkII.
    I don't earn money with my cameras, so it's a different story. My D60 will need some service this year and I won't buy a new dSLR as long as Canon doesn't come with a better viewfinder. Or, more probable, an Epson R-D1 or digital Zeiss-Ikon :)

    Sorry if this is a bit difficult to read, my last bussiness english lesson was in may 1992
     
  32. of course Grant but you know that there is more to life than Sports Illustrated so judging photography by this narrow view would be incorrect. If I was shooting for SI then my equipment would be 1DMKII with 1V as a backup.
     
  33. "We would like Al Kaplan to go out and shoot some pictures and be able to present them in digital format on this forum. "

    Indeed. And if getting them online is a problem, Al, you can mail me prints and I'll scan them for you.
     
  34. Al, I have a question. <p>
    What exactly would it take for you to go digital? What would you buy into and what do you
    want and expect from a digital camera? What are your requirements? Just that it take Leica
    glass? Or are there other things? <p>
    Just curious.
     
  35. Another day, another opportunity to do some trolling.
     
  36. Cars and Computers are a bad analogy to cameras, expecialy Leicas!

    Try to hook up an Apple ][ or Comodore 64 to the internet. It is possible and you can read photo.net with it. But better don't try the Miami Heralds website :)

    My mexican Volkswagen Beatle was great in 1982, but today I like a heating which actualy works without the risc of carbon monoxide poisoning. Come to think of that, with the help of an airbag I still might have my incisors. And with anti skid brakes I might not have needed the airbag.

    A Leica M2 or M3 on the other hand is not so different to a M7 that an upgrade is realy needed. A good handheld meter is probably better than the built in and who needs AE anyways? I use my D60 in manual, it makes more sense to me than AE with manual exposure compensation and I never had the lenses to use my Contax 167MT in programm mode.
     
  37. Volker, I don?t know I think it?s a good analogy. The heating in my 735i didn?t work when it was new and twenty years later it still doesn?t work.
     
  38. In the past hour I've sent essentially the same thing in emails to several of you. What the hey, let everybody know my deep dark secrets. Here's a Copy & Paste from one of them, with a couple of words bowdlerized.

    I hate shooting SLR's for most situations, and chimping a P&S makes me feel rediculous! I prefer my Leica RFDR's.

    But I also have another problem which doesn't affect my long term memory, but short term I'm extremely forgetfull. About 4 years ago, for never diagnosed reasons, I had a few epileptic seizures in my sleep. The docs answer to that was "Give him DRUGS" and the doseage was large enough to effing guarantee that I'd not be able to have another seizure! After nearly 2 years of walking around in a spaced out fog, and KNOWING that I was in a fog, I took it upon myself to see just how small a dose I could get by with. So gradually over several months I went from 900mg a day to the 75 I take now. The doc says in theory it shouldn't be enough to do anything, but when I tried stopping altogether, with the doc's knowledge, I had another seizure a couple days later. So I take a pill every night at bedtime.

    I bring this up because that is the main reason I don't delve more into digital. I can play around with something new for a few hours, like the scanner, get to the point where I've actually scanned an image, even posted it or emailed it. The next day I can't recall what the eff I did, back to square one. It's very frustrating! I really wish it was otherwise.
     
  39. Trevor, are you printing your own files? I would imagine the costs catch up pretty fast if you're printing at home and are serious about it in the sense that you work up a digital print in similar fashion to a darkroom print. A good printer, ink and high quality papers are pretty pricey. I'm not offering a price/analysis here,but I bet at the end of the day, digital's not that much cheaper than film just as a guestimate. I'm doing both, and its expensive either way you go. Needless to say, I would love to have a D70 or D10,D20 or S3 or whatever. But I just bought a Hasselblad..oh well. Choices.
     
  40. "...I can play around with something new for a few hours, like the scanner, get to the point where I've actually scanned an image, even posted it or emailed it. The next day I can't recall what the eff I did, back to square one..."...........errr, Al, there's a device called a pen, and when used with something called paper, they kinda remember for ya.

    or, you could even use the computer you did the digital editting on, with another window opened to Word, and type it in as you do it.
     
  41. even though it might have sounded sarcastic.........which I guess it was...........it is exactly what I do. I keep notes of everything new I do.......eventually, I don't need to look at the notes anymore
     
  42. Hi Mr./ Capt. Kaplan, sorry to hear about the situation. Try to pretend you really like scanning and that it was fun and informative maybe it will stick better. Regards Peter
     
  43. Sorry to hear about that Al, I hope everything works out. <br>
    In a nut shell. Just forget about going digital until Leica bring out an all manual Digital
    camera with one button on the back: Tri-X. Otherwise, it's a lot to learn. <p>
    On the otherhand, nothing like daily training to help your memory get better. <p>

    Cheers, Kipling
     
  44. Thanks Thomas. That's asuming I can find "Word" the next time...LOL Hey, I'm serious, not kidding. If you haven't been there you might not understand, but for me it's reality. I walk around making notes, believe me! Another thing I've lost is my absolute sense of direction which other boating people envied. I could spend all day out fishing, cruising around, foggy weather or out of sight of land, and instinctively know exactly which way to head directly back to port. No more! Now it's compass, charts and GPS.
     
  45. Wow Al, sorry to hear this!
    My grandmother was epileptic and took drugs. In the dark times from 1933 to 1945 she was short of beeing subjected to euthansia for that fact.

    I know she took drugs twice a day but her long and short term memory was very good. Sometimes to good for the rascal who was her grandson.

    In the navy I had a friend who got seizures under stress which increased over time that he was decomissioned after he fell from his scooter. He never had seizures while under stress but short after that and he is nearly cured now.

    Another friend is a classical singer, she studied music and singing and works as a teacher because she can't act on a stage, but she lives without drugs after she was in and out of a hospital for five years. Ok, she's got an advantage, she's married to her neurologist.

    So I hope that there is a cure for you without drugs or with lesser side effects.
     
  46. A better analogy to old cameras is old boats. Here is my 1930 Old Town Canoe in 2001, fresh from 6 new ribs, 3 new planks, and new canvas (courtesy of North Woods Canoe's Roland Thurlow, the Old Town equivelent to Golden Touch). My Dad re-canvassed it in '65 and '79, and I expect my 1 year old daughter will do the same in 2040. I hope she can find film for her SL in 2040....
    00B0GO-21690084.jpg
     
  47. Barry, printing at home costs up to 40 pence (80 cents maybe) per small print even not allowing for mistakes. This factors in good quality paper, inks etc.

    Even this will not give the quality or longevity of a good Fuji Frontier print. Printing at home is a no-no for me if the end result is to be framed and sold. (I would never sell a home print to a customer, only a proper Frontier 300dpi laser print onto Crystal Archive Paper or similar.)

    What I do with pictures I keep is smarten them up on PS7 and save for the size of print I will require then squirt it onto a CD which gets processed at my favourite lab or (more recently) send the file off to www.photobox.co.uk and have the print delivered next day.

    Up until now my film results come back to me on Neg and CD but I am getting a neg scanner very soon. (Next week probably.) So things will change a little.

    I gave up getting those little 6x4s long ago. Waste of time, space and money.
     
  48. Al, my ugly old b*stard friend... does this mean that if I insult you today you won't remember it tomorrow? ;>)

    Keep truckin' Al... you know we all love you. Well... most of us do. Some of us do, at least... I like you, Al. ;>)

    Now, can we talk about something important... like where I can pick up a set of 16x20 developing trays for a quarter?

    Dennis
     
  49. Is Al Kaplan going Digital?​

    Al misspelled t-r-o-l-l-i-n-g
     
  50. I don't think canoes are a good analogy. Back in '56 I paid $275 for a Willits in Tacoma. In '85 I traded it to a friend for an '80 Jeep station wagon. He took it to Missouri when he retired and put a couple of coats of varnish on it. The other day I got an e-mail from him that he had turned down ten grand for it! <p> Ten years ago it wasn't easy to get 36 month financing on a new car; I bought a Crysler Van in '02 and got 60 months. Appears the banks think they last longer these days.
     
  51. Hang in there Al. We're rootin' for ya. I went digital with a Pentax
    43WR a water resistant 4 MP P&S. It can be dunked but not operated under water. I fish from a kayak and it is great for that and general fun snaps. It's not the cats ass but adequate for my purposes. $300 on the bay and $100 more for a 512MB card and rechargable batteries.
     
  52. "Appears the banks think they last longer these days.'

    Maybe you're right about that... maybe it's because they can fix'em easier by just replacing whole units instead of trying to repair major parts.

    What I had read one time, though, was that there was a trend of more and more people now buying late model used cars instead of new ones. They depreciate so much early on that you can get deals on one or two year old cars. If more people are buying late model cars, that tells me that there must be an available supply of late model cars. That tells me that some people must be changing cars every year or two... or it could be they simply couldn't make the payments on them.

    Dennis
     
  53. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Get some facts instead of coming up with things out of your head.

    Here's a hint. Statistics on the growth of leasing. They're out there, if you want to have facts. Most people turn over the car at the end of the lease rather than pay a lump sum. Has nothing to do with the quality of the vehicle Get some facts.
     
  54. Al,

    my mother has had the same troubles since high school, and has been on low-level meds all of her adult life.

    She also suffers from the same short-term to long-term memory conversion issue. She returned to college as an adult (when I was in college), to try to get an associate degree. I tutored her in math, and she did fine for each quiz and test. BUT, if exams were comprehensive (i.e. covering the entire semester), she had to go back and re-learn ALL of it. Short term memory was ok, she ace'd tests on current material; conversion to long term, no way.

    The only approach that we eventually found to work was to litterally study everything as the semester went on. Then, surprisingly, she DID retain it (mostly) at the end.

    Was it a 'math' issue? Nope, she was a book-keeper - and a darned good one. Numbers were her work.

    The moral?? Do it again and again and again and again and again... it might become long term memory eventually.

    Good luck.
     
  55. Dennis, one minute you're begging a source of inexpensive 16 x 20 trays and the next you're complaining that one year old cars are too cheap. Or were you complaining that new ones were too expensive? I thought that this thread started out as a discussion on digital and now I know more than I needed to about canvas covered canoes, and I'm thinking "Oh crap, what's that 12 ft. Penn Yan canvas covered varnished wood Cartopper worth today, the one I bought used for $120 in '65 and sold for about the same in '73?" You're just trying to get me upset and confused! You probably heard rumors about how much money I pay certain other people here to confuse me and insult me! Just for that I'm gonna charge you a buck apiece for those 16x20 trays!
     
  56. Listen to Jeff. He's an expert on everything from photography to who can post comments in the Leica forum to cell phone use and digital camera use in developing nations. He knows it all and is only too happy to tell it to you.
     
  57. I know about leasing. What they try to put you in, though, is a longer lease, like three to six years.

    But what's the argument? So what if cars are not he best example of a disposable goods mindset. Cars are modular nowadays and they replace entire parts and systems instead of repairing them like they used to. The fact that we have become more oriented towards disposbale products I don't think is disputed by any facts or expert opinions. Just in my lifetime people used to wash cloth diapers; milk bottles and coke bottles were re-fillable; disposable razors even weren't around. You don't hear about people repairing 5 or 10 year old television sets. They buy new ones. Cheaper modern materials, cheaper foreign labor and people on the go have made some disposable things more practical. That's all I was saying. Modern technology has also advanced (and continues advancing) at such a rapid pace some things, particularly electronics, become obsolete quicker. People tend to replace them with newer, improved models. And many products are not made as durable as they used to be. It's just different than it used to be... that's all I was saying. So when you see something like a 45 year old Leica M3 overhauled and still in use it's kind of an anomoly. Again, I'm not saying that's good or bad (although I kinda like it)... it just is what it is.

    Dennis
     
  58. Al, at least I know why you're still talking to some people here. You just can't remember all the sh*t they've said. ;>)

    Help me out here, don't you think things are more disposable nowadays? Remember when people would replace the picture tube in their TV if it went bad. Sh*t, now if their TV goes bad they're down at Circuit City in a flash picking out a wide screen something or other HD set. Things aren't like they used to be, Al. Why I remember when we had to walk twelve miles to school in the snow and... nevermind. ;>)
     
  59. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Listen to Jeff.
    Maybe you never heard of google, Eliot. It's very easy to get facts on the internet, instead of making things up. There's still no backup for much of what is said on here, some of which, as I have pointed out, is obviously wrong. It doesn't take being an expert on anything except research, and that isn't difficult. Most people don't take the time to find out facts, it's easier to act like they know. I don't talk about things I don't directly know or haven't researched.
    Instead, people like you and Dennis attack me rather than the information. Much, much easier when you don't do the research.
     
  60. "...or it could be they simply couldn't make the payments on them."
    Dennis is right. It's called a "give up." A vehicle owner turns his car over to a middleman, then reports the vehicle stolen to police and his insurance company. It's such a problem in the NYC metro area that the NYPD have conducted sting operations and outlying areas have set up special offices to deal with the increase in fraud.
    Phony automobile insurance theft claims resulting from automobile "give up" schemes and stolen cars remains a priority for the Office of Insurance Fraud Prosecutor," said Prosecutor Gooden Brown. "It is clear that too many people are willing to lie to government officials and to insurance companies claiming that their car were stolen in order to avoid repair bills or expensive end-of-lease payments..."
    Here's a link to the article.
     
  61. Jeff. The point I was trying to make was about the nasty way you reply to people in trying to make your point, not about the correctness of the content.
     
  62. OK, cars are out, canoes are out...what the hell are we gonna use as an analogy?
     
  63. Jeff, calm down. I never attacked you. We were just having a discussion here. Some things are not succeptible to absolute empirical proof. Statistics can be made to stand up and whistle "Dixie" if you like. I think the initial points I made were valid. (Although I can't remember what they were... maybe I have Al Kaplan's disease.) ;>)

    Just relax, I don't think Grant and I were in total disagreement but just saying similar things differently. I also made it extremely clear that I wasn't passing judgment on any trend or minset... that they simply are what they are. Relax, man... life's too short for all this bullsh*t.

    Dennis
     
  64. My friend gave me his digicam a few years ago after he "upgraded". I don't remember where I put it. I am currently not going the digital camera route, although, I did just pick-up a CD from Walgreen's so I could e-mail some pic's, first steps. I spend enough time in front of computers and DCS's (Distributed Control Systems), and SCADA and PLC (don't ask) screens.

    Al,

    Is the drug called Dilantin (anti-seizure med)? My Doctor gave me a perscription for it after my brain tumor was removed in 1993 (80% mortality within five years). I checked myself out of the hospital after each operation (two some weeks apart) and didn't even fill it. No seizures, yet. Fight it, Al. Don't take sh*t, don't kiss a$$, be yourself, and live each day as if were your last.
     
  65. "Unless it's in times of economic crunch people don't keep their cars as long as they used to."

    If I was not entirely correct on this particular statement then I am extremely sorry and apologize profusely. However, that's not a major deal for the point I was making... that we now live in a society with a much more disposable mentality... even with cars because they are now modularly built, and parts and sytems are thrown away and replaced rather than being repaired. And in the area of electronics, technology is advancing so rapidly that what you buy today may be obsolete tomorrow (figuratively speaking, of course) and people tend to replace rather than repair things. There...
     
  66. Trevor, interesting, but what's the cost of 8 X 10 or 11 X 14 and up? It costs me several dollars for a 11 x 14 Noritsu print. But I also feel that using archival papers on the Epson 2200 I'm getting prints good enough that if I felt the photo had merit and someone wanted to buy my prints, I would not have a problem selling. But it takes some work to get the prints dialed in to that level of quality that I would feel comfortable doing it. The paper for 81/2 by 11 is over a dollar a sheet up to $2 per sheet, plus the ink and processing time. It will take me generally several (wide variance, 4 - 8 enhanced matts before going over to the final fine art paper, and then I usually have those by the 2nd or third print at the most, except for some wierd tough one. Its costing about 10-15 bucks a print, at least for the 1st one as a very rough average. I'm just not sure at the end of the day, that the convenience of digital lays in its costs savings if you are printing bigger than 3 x 5s or 4x6's.
     
  67. Well Gentlemen, and a Lady or two, that was fun! Thanks for all your well wishes and emails. Yup, it's cheaper to buy a brand new TV than it used to be to get a picture tube replaced. Better picture, better sound to boot. Automobiles are better today, all true. No argument there on my part. Let's all try to get along a bit better, share and trade information, and be friendly with one another.
     
  68. I think Digital Imaging is here to stay. Like wars, famines and broken promises.I am a photographer. The image is everything.
    I mostly use Leicas.One has passed 6,500 rolls through! It ain't that much since 1967.I also read about digital.My main objection is the look of the prints and on most cameras, the awful delay in firing.
    I do actually have CD's scanned for internet use, for certain pro jobs. My PC at home cannot yet accept the scanner.
    Al, sorry about the memory thing. It's plain lousy. I have to carry all the phone numbers I need. I cannot remember even my home number!
    I can remember passages from books etc.It is numbers only!
     
  69. Al, for TV if you replace a 10 year old TV with a similar sized new one (tube variety), your savings in energy (assuming it's on a normal 6 hours per day) will pay for itself in 4 years or so.

    I have a friend who had seizure it took him 2 years to recover, the meds were nasty, he is finally off of them.
     
  70. Al, digital might after all be a good thing for you. Someone can set it up so that you just plug a cable into it and on pops a dialog box asking to copy the images to a directory. You won't have to do any scanning etc and perhaps you'll get a hang of some basic image editing keystrokes that could be yellow stickied on your monitor. Something like ctrl-shift-L, ctrl-shift-alt-L and ctrl-shift-B might be all you need for most images. That will adjust the levels, contrast and the color and off you go.
     
  71. AL, so are you in or out?
     
  72. AL; I get 2 issues of "THE BIG PICTURE" magazine a month. The current Feb 2005 issues and a mess of others are covering up my desk at work now. Other "freebie" magazines us printers get are "Signs of the Times" for signage; "Digital Output" : the only magazine dedicated to capture, creation, output, creation.... Another freebie is "digital Graphics, another is "Instant & Small Commercial Printer". Yet another is "Quick Printing". We get more freebies; but this gets abit boring :)

    The first several free magazines mentioned are aimed at printers; signshops; digital users of "Large format" printers. The advertising keeps these rags afloat. We get many 10 pounds of these each month; squared aimed to get you to buy the latest printer; rip; scanner; etc.

    Al; page 10 in your magazine shows a cool Durst 67 Film Scanner; that scans a 6x7cm neg in 15 seconds; a 75meg file; at a cool 29.7k price. www.durstus.com Looks like a fun toy!
     
  73. Yeah, Kelly, I was looking at that Durst film scanner ad but I have a Brooks Veriwide 100 that makes 6x10cm negatives. Also, when when my ladyfriend looked at it she didn't think that the two tone blue color scheme would fit in well with the carpets and drapes that I have in that room. I'm also somewhat concerned about reliability issues when you start playing around with scanners that much under fifty grand.;-)
     
  74. When you right down to it, the one advantage that film has over digital is the somewhat subjective notion that film provides more pleasing images due to greater range of sensitivity, bokeh, or some other hard to define factor. But digital capability is improving much faster than that of film, and will continue to do so, because that's where the buck are going.

    I used to be associated with strategic overhead recce. I haven't had a clearance in this area for nearly 40 years, but the Corona program has been mostly or totally declassified. When Corona was active (mostly in the 60s), images were captured on film, and the film was recovered when the Corona ejected film capsules that were caught in midair by specially equipped C-130s. The Corona satellites were limited in lifetime and film capacity, and obviously were not exactly real time. From what I read in Aviation Week, digital technology is now employed, and data are transmitted to earth electronically, meaning long lived satellites and quasi real time data availability. I don't have a clue as to how the quality of the imagery stacks up, but I would be greatly surprised if the customers were satisfied with any degradation whatsoever. I am not totally happy about it, but digital is the wave of the future; we analog humans will have to keep up somehow.
     
  75. CompUSA charges $95 for their technicians to look at your ailing computer. Add on the cost of replacement parts if they figure out that something needs to be replaced. Now notice that Microsoft no longer supports Windows 98, so you probably should replace that as well. Observe that a brand new computer that totally outclasses what you have sells for $500. At what point do you decide repairing your computer is no longer cost effective? It's a puzzle, at least for me.
     
  76. Buy a Dell with 3 year onsite next day support cover.

    After 3 years donate it to a good cause of your choice or the local community centre (or whatever) then buy another one under 3 year cover.

    They dont cost a lot in comparison to what I spend on cameras/photography in 3 years. PCs are a commodity like tins of beans nowadays. Pile em high, sell em cheap.

    Dell UK will sell a basic package for 370 GBP (a bit minimal for my needs but OK for most people I expect) with a years cover on it. That is only a pound a day even assuming you get another one every year! In the USA I expect they are twice as cheap to buy.
     
  77. Yes, as I suspected the current special offer on USA Dell site is $399.

    There are only a few people I know who would even get out of bed in the morning for that money!
     
  78. Not to be contentious Jeff, but quoting facts from research has to be kept in context and
    become applied knowledge. For example:

    "People keep cars longer. From 1992 to 2002, the average age of the car owned in the US
    increased by 20% (Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Department of Transportation, U.S.
    Government), by no means insignificant. Here is the exact quote: Because of
    improvements in the longevity of passenger cars, the median age of the automobile fleet
    in the United States has increased significantly, from 7.0 years in 1992 to 8.4 years in
    2002. Note that most of the this time hardly qualifies as "economic crunch," quote the
    opposite. "

    The above is not the same as "Unless it's in times of economic crunch people don't keep
    their cars as long as they used to." Which, admittedly is a general statement, but not hard
    to get.

    With the growing advent of leasing, people don't keep a new car as long as they used to...
    thus the disposable society reference. The 2 year lease was promoted on a mass scale ( by
    Ford Leasing Division) to promote turn-over to keep Detroit pumping out new cars. Those
    lease cars are then absorbed by the GROWING body of drivers. There simply are more car
    owners in 2002 than in 1992, and both the lower economic strata (also growing) and the
    aging population (front end of the Baby Boom "pig in a python" ) tends to hold onto used
    cars longer because they both can ... AND have to.

    But in regards to a disposable society which clearly is in reference to new products, in the
    context of the discussion here, it seems to be a reasonable analogy.
     
  79. Kib, I couldn't remember where I put it so I sent you my limited edition 1992 Aleksander Nevsky M6 commemorating the 750th anniversary of the battle of Novgorod. I hope that's OK;-)
     
  80. Marc:

    It seems both Al and I suffer some sort of neurological deficit.. in Al's case it affects his memory and in my case an apparent inability to make myself understood. In fact, this is the second time it has happened to me on this forum this week. You've done such a wonderful job cleaning up for me I was wondering if you would mind writing all of my posts here from now on. I'll put in general terms what I'm trying to say and leave it to you to express it coherently for me. It would really be appreciated. ;>)

    Thanks,

    Dennis
     
  81. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Marc, there's not much point in keeping this going, but you seem to also be willing to quote without facts.
    There simply are more car owners in 2002 than in 1992
    In the same period, individual vehicle registrations increased by about 1.6% (Bureau of Transportation Statistics.) Trivial.
     
  82. Well you seem to be willing to write without using grammar, so we'll call it even.
     
  83. Well you seem to be willing to write without using grammar

    Thousands view this site, and might want to post, who are not of the english speaking special race. Maybe they are not worthy with their bad grammer..what do you think plonker?

    Being nice tonight, very nice. But i could change.
     
  84. Sorry about the bad grammer. Sure you got the meaning.
     
  85. Okay Jeff, once again facts out of context. 1.6% doesn't prove anything in the context of
    this discussion. Gross numbers of registrations could mean 100% of the cars were
    replaced in that time period but grew at a modest rate of 1.6 total. They could all be new
    cars for all you know from that fact ... thus proving the premiss of a throw away society.

    As far as your fact relating to growth of car owners ... that was also taken out of context. It
    was prefaced with this: "...people don't keep a new car as long as they used to." The
    context was "new car owners". But I didn't have my lawyer read my post first so I didn't
    repeat it in every sentence.
     
  86. BTW, 1.6% isn't trivial given the massive numbers involved.
     
  87. ...and I get accused of taking a thread off topic? This one sure did wander off in various directions! OK, I've had license for 46 years, owned 2 compact station wagons, a hatchback, a VW bug, 2 VW Microbuses, 2 Toyota Tacoma pick-ups, and one motorcycle. Three vehicles were purchased new, the others used.
     
  88. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    what year was the micro bus? 27 window and rolling roof top by any chance?
     
  89. I bought a 1961 Microbus in 1967, or maybe late '66, and traded that for a new 1972 model in the spring of 1972. Neither one was the super cool model with the rows of little windows over the side windows or the retractable canvas top. We did paint up the '61 kind of wild with flowers all over the front and the obligatory bumper sticker in the rear "Ass or Grass ~ Nobody Rides For Free". Life WAS a Cheech and Chong movie in those days! Gotta find the Kodachromes of that van.
     
  90. The internet is a wonderful place for research, but you still have to use some common sense...And you have to be willing to admit that your preconceptions may be wrong, Marc.

    The average age of a private vehicle IS rising, and rising rather unequivocally. No matter whether some people drive vehicles for shorter times; the average age is rising. Find the info here at the DOT website: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/onh2p3.htm

    Vehicle registrations have increased faster than the nominal rate quoted by Jeff. I suspect his figure is for passenger cars, which have held about steady or increased slightly. But SUV and truck registrations have grown tremendously over the last couple decades, as can be seen on the above site and also at the Statistical Abstract of the United States, Table 1047.
     
  91. But getting back on topic, if Al accidentally registered one of his trucks as a bus, or one of his buses as a truck, wouldn't that render all these stats meaningless ?
     
  92. NO NO NO NO NO ! The original topic was a friggin' trade magazine, The Big Picture, and about the February issue being devoted to B&W digital imaging, and also that it talked about the Leica R digital back. From there it wandered enough to make anybody dizzy.
     
  93. "...and I get accused of taking a thread off topic? "

    Given the slightest pretext, you get accused of derailing threads into your same-old-topic, an anti-digital rant.
     
  94. Funny Douglas, I guess that was the point I was trying to make with Jeff. That using
    common sense in the context of the point being made, that we do live in a somewhat
    throw away society. That's all. I don't necessarily have many preconceptions on the subject
    except for the fact that I live in Detroit, and worked for both car companies and Ford
    Credit doing their marketing. The numbers are always deceiving because percentages
    taken out of context are misleading. Frankly, a consistent 1.6% gain would be welcome
    right now in Detroit since 2002. I also know certain segments of the society are keeping
    cars and trucks longer, so Jeff's point is also technically correct there. But new cars are
    being turned quicker than previous decades due to the growth of leasing.

    But common sense in other areas of turn-over marketing argues for a throw-away society
    compared to the past. Perhaps in context to this argument, a better example would be
    disposable cameras, disposable diapers, and the growing land-fill problem.
     
  95. If anything, Kevin, I started off talking about some positive aspects of digital in this thread before it wandered astray, ending up dicussing the auto industry in Detroit amongst other things. Sorry that you got so upset about my lack of anti digital rant that you felt compelled to get your anti-Al rant in anyway. What the heck, if it makes you feel better go for it. I certainly wouldn't want you feeling bad.
     
  96. Thanks, Al. That - and this cup of coffee - do have me feeling better!
     
  97. Marc, if you were trying to support Dennis point ("Things aren't made as durable as they used to be and don't last as long either. Unless it's in times of economic crunch people don't keep their cars as long as they used to."), then you would both be well-advised to steer away from autos as an example. Cars are in use for longer periods, on average, which contradicts Dennis' point. In fact, even without looking up the stats, I think common sense would indicate that the average car lasts longer, and is in use longer, today: after all, when I was a kid, a brand new car came with a 12-month, 12,000 mile warranty; today the warranties run 3-4 times longer, suggesting greater longevity.

    More fundamentally, I think Dennis' broader point (things are not as well-built, not as durable as they used to be) is unquantifiable (how to measure the durability of "things"?). But I could offer a different interpretation: things are at least as durable as they were in the "good old days," but now people are, on average, more affluent, hence they frequently "trade up" for better technology.
     
  98. people don't keep their cars as long as they used to -Dennis
    Cars are in use for longer periods, on average, which contradicts Dennis' point. -Douglas
    No, it doesn't contradict Dennis' point at all. If cars are on the road longer now, but they don't stay with their owners as long as they used to, then both statements can be correct.
    Furthermore, Dennis was relating anecdotal evidence, which relies on personal observation and memory rather than statistics. Statistics and anecdote are both necessary tools when attempting to understand the world, and one isn't automatically valued higher than the other.
     
  99. Here's another snippet from one of Dennis' posts on this subject:
    "Things aren't made as durable as they used to be and don't last as long either." This is arguably not true, as indicated by the automobile example.

    And by the way, Kevin, your statement that "Statistics and anecdote are both necessary tools when attempting to understand the world, and one isn't automatically valued higher than the other," is grossly incorrect -- you should ask some social or physical scientists whether they consider the two types of evidence to be of equal validity. When we only have anecdotal evidence, we'll use it --but reliable statistics are always preferred. Always. In academia, the term "anecdotal evidence" is most often used apologetically by those offering such evidence, and scornfully by those pointing out the inadequacy of such evidence.
     
  100. Jeez... maybe automobiles are not the best analogy. But it's not an incorrect illustration of the points I was trying to make.

    The same statistics, in my experience, can be often be used to either support or refute an issue. They must be taken in a broader context. Are cars "made better"... are they "more durable" today? Many componenets which were once made of durable metal have been replaced with plastic which may or may not be as durable. But what does "durable" mean?

    As I pointed out, automobiles are made in a modular fashion today. Entire parts and systems are replaced rather than repaired. But are those parts and sytems lasting as long today as they did in the past? If the parts and systems break down faster but can be cheaply replaced so the cars remain on the road longer, then both arguments are supported: That cars last longer (kept in service longer), and cars are not made as durable as they once were (because they are easier and cheaper to repair). But the stats cited add nothing to whether original owners are keeping their new cars longer.

    But the point was about a disbosable goods mentality, on which I passed no judgment, which could be analogized to how people appraoch modern photographic equipment. Let's fight about it... ;>)
     
  101. should read "disposable"... one day I will learn to proof read.
     
  102. In academia, the term "anecdotal evidence" is most often used apologetically by those offering such evidence, and scornfully by those pointing out the inadequacy of such evidence.
    All that means is that the evidence is being presented in a rather raw state, for which the presenter is apologizing and the receiver is complaining. But any academic who thinks anecdote is a synonym for wive's tale is a fool. There's always been a struggle between the Apollonian and Dionysian, but to value one to the exclusion of the other is a mistake.
     
  103. "But any academic who thinks anecdote is a synonym for wive's tale is a fool."

    I never equated anecdotal evidence with wives' tales. But I did take issue with your claim that anecdotal and statistical evidence are considered equally valuable. After twenty years in academia, I feel quite qualified to state that you will have a hard time finding any academics to agree with that statement.
     
  104. But I never made that statement. I didn't say anecdote and statistic are "equal," I said that one doesn't automatically have more value than the other. Or aren't academics familiar with the saying Lies, damned lies and statistics? ;-)
     
  105. You're obviously not trained in the scientific method and do not read academic publications. There's nothing wrong with that, but there is something wrong with pretending that you know what you are talking (er, writing) about.
     
  106. The academics would still be discussing the original topic of this thread ;>)
     
  107. And so the academic, when confronted with an argument from an outsider, lobs a smoke grenade in the form of an ad-hominem attack and retreats back into the safety of the ivory tower.
     
  108. Well, I may be doing that, to an extent. Kevin. That's because I can't really teach you the scientific method via the internet. But here's a question: Why do you think the FDA runs large-scale clinical drug trials instead of just licensing a drug based on success with one or two patients (i.e, licensing on anecdotal evidence)?

    I'll give you the answer: because anecdotal evidence isn't worth much.
     
  109. I can't believe I actually read to the end of this thread. It has been a slow day at the office today.
     
  110. "Why do you think the FDA runs large-scale clinical drug trials instead of just licensing a drug based on success with one or two patients (i.e, licensing on anecdotal evidence)?"

    Douglas. The FDA doesn't run clinical trials, the drug companies do, because they are required by the FDA. And even the large trials are not a guarantee of the safety of the drug. For example, a drug can be approved based on a trial or trials in a specific group of individuals, but it may then be prescribed to others without knowing that there is a subgroup of people in whom the drug is dangerous. This seems to be the case with Vioxx, which increases the number of cardiovascular events in men with other risk factors.

    The value of anecdotal evidence is that it may suggest a hypothesis that can then be tested, not because a definite conclusion can be made based upon a few anecdotes.
     
  111. Douglas, the scientific method, as I remember learning it, is the attempt to remove human biases and prejudices from the process of observation, right? The better the experiment is constructed, the more reliable the data will be, etc.. But it's always just an attempt, isn't it, and therefore the possibility for error must be assumed, correct? I'm not saying, by any stretch, that one yokel's eyewitness account equals a two-year clinical trial, but to completely dismiss the one is to some degree a product of group arrogance towards outsiders rather than some lofty ideal. Your own native bias, in other words.
    Dennis' original point appears entirely valid, as does yours. If individuals aren't keeping their cars as long, yet cars themselves are on the road longer, that simply means that a car will have more owners over its lifetime.
     
  112. BTW, Douglas, I'm not "pretending" that I'm something I'm not, or that I know something I don't know. I'm recalling what I learned in school and making my own stab at the scientific method, flawed as it may be. I apologize for mangling any words I borrowed from your lexicon.
     
  113. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    why doesn't everyone go scan a negative, a dusty one, to keep yourselves busy for a bit?
     
  114. why doesn't everyone go scan a negative...
    Heh, Kevin's gone over to the Dark Side - he can go shooting instead...
     
  115. Hmm, don't artists use anecdotal evidence? I know I do....
    intuition, first hand experience, etc.
     
  116. Hmm, don't artists use anecdotal evidence? I know I do.... intuition, first hand experience, etc.
    Spot on Ray. Spot on.
     
  117. "...don't artists use anecdotal evidence?"

    Different realm entirely.
     
  118. Disagree.
     
  119. ....respectfully, of course. ;)
     
  120. I knew a guy like you back in high school, Ray (anecdotally speaking)... always wanting to fight. I'll have you know that a recent study by the Department of Health and Human Resources recently concluded that an anecdotal study funded by the Endowment For The Arts was entirely incorrect in its conclusion that artists remember 68% of anecdotes pertaining to incidents that are the same or similar to their art work. So there...! Look, Ray, when you've been slinging bullsh*t as long as I have then come back and we'll talk. ;>)

    Reespectfully yours,

    Dennis
     
  121. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    how'd you make out scanning those negs?
     
  122. Yeah ,we need the latest and greatest. Buckets of money make us the best: and and and on. Lets be honest, real photographers need 90 million pixels at least,well, until 100 million pixels arrive.

    Are we doing the leica fondlers in reverse here. Have a little think with the grey matter...strain that lonely place.

    Old brown bread HCB didn't need all the pixel wonder stuff, did he!

    Anyone better around here. Have a little think.
     
  123. Dennis, Brad. Simple mechanical camera, and a simple digi.

    Work it out.
     

Share This Page