Seen this?

[jim_gibbons]

<p>I assume this idea has been around a few years in some form or another, digital backs and so forth, but I actually liked the insane idea of this one. I wondered which forum to post this in but decided since it would allow me to shoot digital pictures with my Argus A I would put it here. <br>

<a href="http://www.re35.net/">http://www.re35.net/</a></p>

[JDMvW]

<p>It's been covered already at http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00YVS3</p>

[SCL]

<p>April Fools Day, again & again.</p>

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>Certainly a great April fools day trick. Could be serious though, can you imagine putting one of these in your Leica M6, makes you want to throw up!</p>

[jim_gibbons]

<p>NOOOO! I knew a kid in college who wanted to fit a VHS tape into a motion picture camera. His idea didn't happen either. :)</p>

[gnashings]

<p>This is actually not that far beyond the realm of possibility, and not far down the road either IF anyone decides this would make money. The technology either already exists or is just around the corner to make this quite possible. Still, I feel bad for that poor F1 being raped like that...</p>

[silverscape]

No thanks. It seems to me that would be like trying to put a lawn mower engine in a Lamborghini. Why ruin a perfectly good classic film camera by downgrading to digital snapshots?

 

And can someone PLEASE tell me what is up with people wanting to say "analog" all the time now? What the heck is wrong with just saying FILM? They want to call them "analog cameras," or say "analog film"...what the heck is "analog film" anyway?

 

You can have an analog watch, an analog meter, or an analog signal. But calling a film camera "analog" makes absolutely no sense. That's one of my major pet peeves. It's mostly hipsters doing it. Why do we need some new, fad term for something that has been around for over 100 years? Less than 10 years ago, I NEVER heard the term "analog" being used for film cameras. So why do some people feel the need to say that now? What, do they seriously think that 10 years ago film didn't exist and now we suddenly have to come up with some new name for it?

 

I mean, let's say in another 5-10 years, they discover some new fuel source for cars. Am I suddenly going to stop calling my car a CAR and start calling it a "internal combustion wheeled vehicle" just to try to sound cooler?

[richardsperry]

<p>No one called a clock or watch analog until they made digital clocks and watches.</p>

<p>It is what it is, and describes what you mean.</p>

<p>I don't say analog photography myself. I have no problem saying 'wet photography' or 'wet darkroom' either. It describes what it is very specifically. If one says 'film', there is still a residual meaning that you just take snapshots, and put them in an envelope at Costco.</p>

<p>And on your other point. Maybe not 10 years, but sooner or later your kids or grandkids are going to have to drive to work on "internal digestion vehicles". We use to call them horses. There is no future transportable fuel source on the horizon, and we are at peak oil right now. Nuclear was the only viable or foreseeable future source for vehicle energy, but the Japanese just went and blew that all back 50 years or so. Tell your kids and grandkids to buy 2 acres near their place of work for the future, they are going to need that advice, and teach them how to ride a horse now.</p>

[tomscott]

<p>Chris, I asked that question once and got all kinds of answers, some of them valid, many of them quite sarcastic. You may find this interesting: <a href="../casual-conversations-forum/00RQla">http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00RQla</a></p>

[chuck_foreman1]

Well Chris you pretty much said what I often think! Thanks! Tom I remember your post .. Chris should too!

[silverscape]

Thanks, Chuck and Tom!

 

Richard, I'm way too young to remember a time before digital watches. (When exactly did they first come out, anyway?) But even so, I've had both kind of watches. And I never referred to a watch or clock with hands as "analog" just because of the mere fact it wasn't digital. I simply just called it a watch or a clock, or at most I might have called it "the kind with hands." In fact, when I was a kid, I had no idea what "analog" even meant. None of my friends did either. I didn't know that term until much later, when I started working with electronics.

 

So I still don't understand what the purpose is for calling film cameras "analog" just because of the mere fact that it isn't digital. Why do we need a new term for something that has already been around for over a century?

 

Calling a multimeter or watch "analog" makes logical sense because it gives you the information in a comparative way. If you look at a meter with a needle gauge and it shows 120 volts, you know that information because of how far the needle has moved on the gauge. The same thing with a watch with hands...you know the time because of how far the hands have moved. The information is given in an analogy, a comparison between two values.

 

But how the heck does that work with a film camera? It doesn't. People want to call film "analog" just because of the mere fact that it isn't an electronic digital camera. Instead of just calling it FILM, they want to try to sound clever and say "analog." For what? And besides, if you really want to get technical, then ALL cameras are "analog" because they capture images in a comparative way. The picture gives you information in a comparative way...how light or dark it is, the color spectrum, depth of field, etc. I mean, it's not like even a digital camera just gives you a bunch of 1's and 0's on the display screen.