Babbage, Rollei and Analogue Revival

[wogears]

<p>Got a link to <a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2012/10/photography">this blog</a> in <em>The Economist.</em> Much of its contents have been discussed (perhaps <em>ad nauseam</em>) before, but the personal angle on Lomography and older cameras seems well expressed. Reference can perhaps be had to the success and acclaim poured (with reason) on Vivian Maier. I guess I could even mention the Slow Food movement, intentional communities and the (slight) resurgence of vinyl LPs. (But, of course, I won't.)</p>

<p><em>Anent</em> the above, I am considering buying a Fuji X-E1. Part of my interest in the X-series is its resemblance to the cameras with which I grew up. (The other part is the excellence of the sensor and lenses.) My left brain is at a loss to explain this.</p>

[ken_jeanette1]

<p>Les, your statement concerning the Fuji "look" is something that has crossed my mind many times. it seems like most camera manufacturers (and i mean old liners like Nikon et al) seemed to have forgotten what a camera looked like for a few years. Since i remember, a camera was a squarish holder with a lens almost smack dab in the middle. if they deviated. (Dial 35) they lost. Then came digital, and it seemed like they religiously avoided that configuration. The lens wound up every place BUT the middle. Finally, they seem to have found their way once again.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>There I was thinking it was Vivian Maier's photos that were acclaimed. Little did I know it was her cameras.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM6US2b5VCo&">Is this gonna be a standup fight or another bug hunt?</a></p>

[philip_wilson]

I agree and I still use vinyl. Interestingly. I have done vinyl vs CD or MP3 comparisons for many years and have yet to

find anyone who prefers the digital sound. With photography however more people prefer the digital look than the film (at

least for colour). I still shoot and love digital Leicas as you can really ignore the digital bit and rear LCD except when you

format a card or change iSO. All my other cameras get you involved in the digital menus on camera which detract from

shooting.

[john_h.1]

<blockquote>

<p>Then came digital, and it seemed like they religiously avoided that configuration.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Its a good thing none of the manufacturers invested in something like "that configuration". Foolishly calling it a DSLR or something. They religiously avoided doing so knowing sales of such things would have failed miserably.</p>

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>I have done vinyl vs CD or MP3 comparisons for many years and have yet to find anyone who prefers the digital sound.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm guessing your listeners love hisses, pops, and skips. <br /> Except for things like grossly over-"worked" originals like some of the Beatle's (Apple) recordings converted over to digital, you can put me down as one who greatly prefers the cleanness and clearness of digital. I have a huge collection of opera on vinyl, and still buy some things on vinyl today, but not where digital recording or remastering is available. </p>

<p>MP3 is another story altogether and is not relevant to anything described as "quality" recording. It does work for earbuds.</p>

<p>Some people do seem to prefer "mushiness" to clarity, which is why, I suppose, von Karajan has a following.</p>

[andrew_gardiner]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm guessing your listeners love hisses, pops, and skips. </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Funnily enough there was a whole, very successful, genre of electronic music back in the nineties and early noughties called 'glitch' and 'low fi'. It was a type of techno and consisted entirely of the kind of hisses, pops and skips found on old vinyl and very good it was too.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>There digital vs. film, vinyl vs. cd, tap vs. bottled claims are all about perception. Sure, some control factors alter results but, in the end, that's what it is.</p>

[gabor_szabo3]

<p>Blogger could have at at least provided accurate camera porn by including photo of the actual 1937 Automat in question instead of a stock image of a much later R'flex T --- FAIL :(</p>