Why are you all obsessing about the digital revolution?

It is very interesting that if you go to any other camera forum

that's not digital-specific, you get almost no postings from members

wondering about the digital onslaught. And I do mean almost none.

Some places none at all. Why are all these other users of manual

focus bodies (Olympus, Minolta, Nikon, Canon, etc) happily plugging

along with their "old" technology and not hand-wringing and arguing

if digital will push them out of their hobby?

 

Could it be that they are truly happy, whereas Leica users need

constant ego stroking and feedback to tell them they made the right

choice in spending $10,000 on cameras and lenses?

 

No one believes more strongly than I, that digital will eventually

win over 90% of the world's photographers, but why can't Leica

posters (I almost did a Freudian and typed 'posers' instead) just let

go of it and take photos while they can, which will probably be their

entire lifetime?

Because they don't cost as much as Leica does and most USERS here are actual Leica investors?

What 'revolution' are you talking about? I use film. Is there something else I should be using in my Leicaflexes? Panty hose?

(a) Digital already <i>has</i> won over 90% of the world's photographers, and

<br>(b) Many/most Leica

posters are almost as old fashioned as Leica itself (which IMO isn't all that bad, anyhow).

I'm not a Leica user and I'm not obsessing about it. How about a moratorium on threads about a moratorium (on threads about a moratorium) on digital this or that? (As for digital, I did think the Casiorski Jupiter-3, just one or two threads ago, was neat.)

er, it keeps the forum going?

 

(go hide)

Maybe 90% of the world's photographers are using digital but the one-hour lab at my local Wallgreen's Drugs is now often staffed by two people instead of one and they sure sell lots of film and single use cameras.

I think it is a fairly small albeit noisy group who obsesses about it. I see no sign of film's fading away and don't actually give a sh*t. I may die tomorrow, today there's plenty of film, and I never was so stupid as to consider any expenditure on this equipment to be an "investment", so I'm has happy as a clam. I'll bet most folks here look at it more or less like that.

Back at the Canon forum posters copulate over the D's. You ain't seen the obsession here yet.

Adding a bit to what Al said, the Walgreen in my area just put in a new Fuji processor.

<<Al Kaplan , feb 18, 2004; 10:04 a.m.

Maybe 90% of the world's photographers are using digital but the one-hour lab at my local Wallgreen's Drugs is now often staffed by two people instead of one and they sure sell lots of film and single use cameras.>>

 

Maybe there's some truth to "the third-world will save film" story after all.

<<Why are all these other users of manual focus bodies (Olympus, Minolta, Nikon, Canon, etc) happily plugging along with their "old" technology and not hand-wringing and arguing if digital will push them out of their hobby?>>

 

Because a 2-body 6-lens system of one of those brands costs less than a used M6.

It's simple, George. Being obsessive is half of what obsessive/retropulsive is all about. ;-)

I'm not obsessed with film or digital. I mean, I'm not obsessed with digital or film. Er, that is, I'm not obsessed with either film or digital. Um, I'm not really obsessed......

 

Did someone mention Prozac?????

Zoloft is better.....100mg daily....

Channel 7 is whipping the debate, "Digital wins, film at 11."

Just curious - When Leica finally introduces the Digital M, with say a 10MP sensor, will the majority of Leica shooters stay with film or switch to digital? Hans, you don't have to answer, as you have already stated elswhere that if film were discontinued you would kill yourself...

Stephen Steiner , feb 18, 2004; 01:11 p.m.

"Just curious - When Leica finally introduces the Digital M, with say a 10MP sensor, will the majority of Leica shooters stay with film or switch to digital? Hans, you don't have to answer, as you have already stated elswhere that if film were discontinued you would kill yourself..."

 

Film will still be around 200 years from now, trust me...

Frankly, I'd be more concerned if toilet paper were to disappear, and it's only slightly older than film.

<P>[From New York Times - City Section - Sunday, Feb 15, 2004.]

<P>Q. I read that toilet paper was invented in New York City. Is that true?

<P>A. The consensus is that toilet paper was first commercially produced about 1857 by Joseph C. Gayetty, who sold flat sheets of "Gayetty's medicated paper for the water closet," for the fairly expensive price of 1,000 sheets for a dollar out of his shop at 41 Ann Street in Lower Manhattan. His name, J. C. Gayetty, was watermarked on each sheet.

<P>Gayetty's customers, who had used sheets torn from catalogs or newspapers, probably resisted the idea of wasting paper. The pages of The New York Times from the late 1850's include many of his advertisements, which stressed the medicinal angle.

<P>"It is conducive to comfort,'' an 1858 ad read. "It is elegant and pure. It is proven beyond doubt to be the finest and purest paper ever made from Manila hemp, and four grand medicines incorporated with the pulp render it a sure cure and preventive of piles."

<P>But not until the brothers E. Irvin and Clarence Scott produced a roll of perforated paper in Philadelphia and founded the Scott Paper Company in 1879 did the idea catch on.

<BR>[End of quoted material.]

I've been reacting to what strikes me as other people obsessing about the digital revolution. I'm perfectly happy shooting film with my Leica, and the cost of my equipment has nothing to do with it. I have no idea what goes on in other forums, but the recent onset of digital-related posts here made me question why the Leica forum was deemed the appropriate forum for venting about how digital technology would bury the film photography to such an extent that film will soon no longer be available (and we might as well give away our cameras immediately), a scenario that I seriously doubt will occur. The stated rationale was that it was appropriate because Leica produces a digital camera. That struck me as somewhat of a stretch as it is not digital technology for which Leica is renowned, nor is it, I suspect, what has drawn people to the Leica forum to begin with. I see it more as an attempt by digital camera buffs and other assorted mischief makers to puncture the Leica balloon. If people are preceived as being too happy (or smug) about their situations, there are always people who will want to rain on their parade. That's how I see it.

 

Dennis

It's been intense lately because the pimple was coming to a head.

 

Indication of the decline of film are there. All other makers are offering a digital

alternative, so owners of those brands need not sweat it. Film can stay or go, it won't

eliminate their preferred brand of gear.

 

Leica kept saying it wasn't possible to make a digital M with current technology.

 

Lots of people (not all) we're not happy to hear that.

 

So, there was (is) a lot of talk centered on the subject.

 

Biggest reason IMO? Few here know that much about digital capture, and used this forum

to get up to speed a bit, even if they still stick with film.

I love the digital revolution. After developing my film I flatbed scan the entire sheet of negatives to make a "contact sheet" which I can view on my monitor and print out. Then I scan what I want with a film scanner. I'm now cranking out really beautiful black and white images on my Espon 1280 with the MIS UT2 Eboni ink using the black only printing method. All this has liberated my from what I always considered the drudgery of the darkroom. If it weren't for this back end digital revolution I probably wouldn't be making images today. It's the BEST of BOTH worlds.

I obsess about the digital revolution mainly at work, when I have a bit of peace and quiet to think about digital photography. I try to follow the advances, but many of the new terms leave me baffled. I can tell you one thing, and that is regardless of how big the sensor will be or if the sensor is full frame or 90%, I will not obsess about the digital M because I will not pay a small mint for a digital M. But, I didn't say I would "never" do it.

The reasons are many and varied, but for the same reasons Luddites obsessed over Industrial Revolution I suppose. Fortunately no one will be hanged.

hung.