mike dixon Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 Clinton, a more apt title for this thread would have been, "Even more proof I know everything." Adding the subtitle "and anyone who disagrees with me is a pathetic moron" would have made it more accurate, but it's probably best you didn't lord your superiority over the rest of us TOO much . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 30, 2005 Author Share Posted October 30, 2005 Oh, Mike, you're just jealous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqsym Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 Wow! Another ''film is dying'' thread. I'm so excited! What can I do now to top that?...I know, watch paint dry!... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 30, 2005 Author Share Posted October 30, 2005 Max- Just make sure you 'watch' it and not 'sniff' it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_thorlin Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 Sir Galahad lives - or is it Don Quixote ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 Yes Mike, you're just jealous that C. knws everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dw fletcher Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 There you go again, Clinton, assuming that others don't know the most basic of facts. I know pros shoot digital, and I know why. That was implicit in my last post. However, most people are not pros. They're artists to varying degrees and instant gratification and lightspeed workflow doesn't mean a damn thing to them. I shoot digital most the time, not only because I do some work for money but also because scanning or going to the lab just isn't fun for me. The cost of switching to digital wasn't a big deal...I am fortunate in that regard. But what I do and why doesn't have any bearing on others. What photojournalists and events photographers do doesn't have any bearing on others, either. The film photographer (the ones who haven't switched just because they wanted to) isn't rare and will not become so until he has technical or economic incentive to go digital. Workflow isn't everything to everyone. Watch the price of digital cameras and film. You'll know when film starts dying. It's just not there yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 30, 2005 Author Share Posted October 30, 2005 Dustin- Digital cameras have been outselling film camera lately. Film use has peaked and there is no chance that it will rebound, unless scientists discover that digital cameras cause cancer or impotency. And as the news reports show, the traditional film companies are having to change or go out of business. While to you, film may not be dying, even you'll have to admit, it is sick, and in bed with a high fever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmphoto1 Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 "I used lower case letters for your names, because you're both small people" Fascinating. I feel like I am being scolded by a 5 year old. chad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmphoto1 Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 BTW, anticipating the next volley, when I use lower case in my signature, it is a sign of informality. Based on your statement above, it is a sign of disrespect. And, in my opinion, immaturity. chad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 30, 2005 Author Share Posted October 30, 2005 chad- Your nit-picky statement that you made in your previous post, was pretty childish if you ask me. (You know which one I'm talking about.) You're just as immature as I. You are the ultimate pot calling the kettle black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dw fletcher Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 Clinton, you don't get it. EK and Fujifilm aren't going to stop making film anytime soon. There might not be the demand for it that there used to be, but people all over the world still want it so they're going to keep churning it out in reduced numbers. At some point demand will fall to the point at which it's no longer profitable to make. Other companies will get licenses to make the stuff and it will become a niche product. Prices will rise. We're not at that point yet. There's just no sense in deriding people for shooting film when it costs $3 a box and they have their cameras paid for. It's a logical choice for them. That's the bottom line. Let's say a person isn't a professional and doesn't shoot a lot of frames, but has a lot invested in a manual focus system. Maybe they do a lot of macro photography or architectural shooting, for example. Want to tell me why they should switch? I've inadvertantly descirbed myself, more or less. My decision to buy a 7D, four lenses, and all the other stuff to go with it was an emotional one, driven by the desire to get a new toy. It made no sense at all for me to switch. I could've kept borrowing a Canon outfit when I had a job to do or wanted to go somewhere that my archaic equipment wouldn't easily take me. And you know what? When I go out shooting I still take a 30 year old camera with me just so I can get down to 24mm. It really doesn't make sense to spend $1000 bucks on a lens I'd use for less than 20% of my shots. For a lot of people, the ability to get wide is more than enough reason to wait for affordable full frame sensors. Okay, I'm tired of repeating myself now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 30, 2005 Author Share Posted October 30, 2005 Dustin- If anyone doesn't get it, it is you. Where did I ever say Fuji and Kodak are going to stop producing film any time soon? You're putting words in my posts, that just aren't there. As for you having to borrow equipment when you want to shot wide angle, why do you think I keep hoping that KM and/or Sony will introduce a full-size sensor DSLR? When I first brought this up in other postings, others would post things like "why does KM need a full-sized sensor?" or "what, isn't a 7D good enough for you?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 30, 2005 Author Share Posted October 30, 2005 Dustin- Furthermore, you accuse me of "deriding" people for shooting film, which is another falsehood you choose to perpetuate. You, and a few other posters, might want to send your resume to the office of the V.P. of the US, I hear there's an opening for people like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dw fletcher Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 Then what the hell do you mean when you say "film is dying"??? I guess you need to explain that. When someone says something's dying, typically they mean it's starting to disappear, do they not? You have insulted film users. You can read the thread for yourself. You've stepped WAY over the line suggesting I belong with that gang of crooks. I work for the other side, friend. But, nonetheless, there you go baiting yet another argument. Too bad we apparently share some common political ground, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dw fletcher Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 By the way, I don't borrow equipment when I need a wide angle. That's when I use film. I used to borrow a friend's digital outfit if I needed quick results (before I got the 7D). I don't blame you for waiting on full frame body. I don't care what digicam you're using in the interim, though...a 35mm film body is better and more versatile. Maybe you don't need the versatility or the high ISO, and that's fine. If you did you'd know exactly why a lot of people still shoot film, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 30, 2005 Author Share Posted October 30, 2005 Dustin- First it's due to the high cost of a digital camera, now you're saying it's because of the 'versatility or high ISO' that keeps people from going digital. I'm not sure what you mean by 'versatility', so I don't know how to response to this claim. As for the 'high ISO', I take it you mean the 'noise' a digital camera produces at highter ISO. Well, if you shoot a high ISO film, you get more grain, so you can take your pick which is worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_hughes4 Posted October 30, 2005 Share Posted October 30, 2005 I can't believe this has come back from the dead! "gotten one of the biggest responses on this (Minolta) forum," this is because it takes a lot of work to teach children. I am a pro, and I use a scanner, not digital cameras, so much for that theory.... Hey Clinton, when's the death of waterpics coming? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 30, 2005 Author Share Posted October 30, 2005 Ken- You're not kidding that "it takes a lot of work to teach children." First, they have to taught how to read, then you have to teach them how to comprehend what they were just read. Even when I make such a simple post, many readers are unable to understand that I never said 'film is DEAD'. I take it that you're a pro who doesn't need a photo right away, so you have the luxury of being able to scan. By the way is that a dedicated film scanner or a flat-bed one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_thorlin Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I think they need to be taught how to write as well. Interesting to note the political insults, they are a new departure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 31, 2005 Author Share Posted October 31, 2005 bill- You're back!!! Why am I not surprised? You must really be suffering from OCD. You still haven't said what Minolta equipment you own. Is it because you don't own any? Or, are you ashamed of what you do own? And since you have nothing to contribute to this forum, you must be here just to cause trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_noble Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Clinton, give it up. Your whole has got very big and there's no way you're getting out. Here's a useless prediction. Kodachrome and technical pan are going to take over the digital market and everybody will use it. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_thorlin Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Does it annoy you that I will not list my Minolta kit ? "You must be here just to cause trouble" - from a master in the field, praise indeed ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesdak Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I've been away for awhile and I return to see this silly post still ongoing! What purpose does it serve?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_thorlin Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Jim - good question. "I can resist anything except temptation" - Oscar Wilde. But the memsahib says "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof" so I guess it is time to say kwaheri again. 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