chuck_t Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 A lot of professionals said doing serious landscape shot needs at least a MF or 4x5 on film to give the viewers "being there" feeling. I agreed because most digital cameras still cannot match the quality of a 4x5 or MF for large PRINT. But if one shooting 35mm digital and the file display on a 46 inches HD TV; such as, Sony XBR series TV, it will looks better than a 4x5 or MF print. Keep in mind a HD TV has only resolve 2MP of resolution. Will the future "wet" or inkjet print become obsolete? (Keep in mind that we already have "digital" picture display frame.) The Sony HD TV quality, contrast and brightness is beating a print everyway as far as I can see. I am talking about big format to display on wall, not those 4x6 prints for family album as a tradition. What is my point? Not the film is going to digital but I am afraid the fuji paper or Kodak print is also going digital and replace by Sony HD picture viewer or whatever that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Soare Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 No matter how cool these gizmos look, there will always be plenty of people who will prefer classic prints, myself included.<br> How many of us buy CDs with, let's say, Shakespeare's works in PDF form, just to read them on a computer display? Not many, I guess. Books are still selling just fine, and they will be selling for many years to come. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_bellenis Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 While I can potentially see a market for a slideshow of images on a large HD screen in an office lobby or a hotel (which could also be used for informational purposes or broadcast TV), I'm not convinced that that medium is competing with high quality exhibition prints for individual buyers or galleries, etc. While an HD screen looks vivid, vibrant and crisp, it contains very little resolution and detail as compared to a large, or medium, format print. They are two totally different products and, for most people and applications, not really interchangeable. Also, for many fine art photographers, the process is almost as important as the result. Shooting large format, processing the sheets and then painstakingly wet printing in a darkroom has a Zen quality that many enjoy and find extremely relaxing and satisfying. There is more to life than pixels, lpm, resolution and having the latest and greatest. Hopefully there will be a place for all media in the future, and - with luck - that choice will not be purely decided by a market rushing to embrace the new while forgetting the joys of the traditional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher_graham1 Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Hmm not many people buy cd's with books on them. They usually download books so they can read them on their palm pilots. Very few come on cd if you actually get a disk it is usually an sd card. I don't say that to say the future of photography is digital on an HD screen. I do think that that will be a way to go, and possibly in the near future there will be quite a few galleries popping up that will be exactly that. Digital photography will mean the end of film about as much as cassettes and cd's meant the end of vinyl. Oh sure you see it a lot less and not every album is released in vinyl but it never completely went away and now it is making a small comeback. No people will not abandon their digital medias for the feel of Analog, but Analog will not die as long as there are still people out there that prefer it. As long as there are Jazz and blues fans there will be records. Same with film. As long as there are people that prefer the random look of grain as opposed to the pattern of noise, and the general feel and look of a print as opposed to a file there will be film and prints. Oh sure it will never be as ubiquitous as it was 20 years ago but there will always be a market and it will go through waves where you see resurgences. Film will be a way to stand out and will probably have certain genres more than others. Nature of the beast I'd say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn_mabbutt Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Bill Gates already does this with paintings - when he had his mansion built he also bought the "digital rights" to a bunch of art, and various pieces display at various times on screens on his walls. I have no idea how the paintings were digitized, though - whether it was a digital picture or more complicated scanning procedure. I don't think it's a wide-spread thing yet, though. It seems to me that with film you're covered either way - if you want to print traditionally, you're fine, if you want to scan it and display it on a screen, you're fine, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johan_de_groote Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Would you prefer to have the Mona Lisa at home or a picture of it on a screen? Tought so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Well, considering that the Monalisa is impossible for anyone to have at home, maybe a picture of it is not that bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peteradownunder Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 what frame do you want to view the dreams you make to sit in?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnashings Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 An HD TV... comparable to a good print... Man, you`ve seen some shitty prints if this is even a contest to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now