bart feliciano Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 You're Welcome, AZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Uhhh, Bart... you are in direct violation of the new rule. Bailey's turn... ;>) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bart feliciano Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Dennis, What i'm doing is perfectly legal under current photo.net rules until they update the photo.net rules page. I have at least a day or two until Josh and Tony post the forum rules changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Bart: I am not too big to admit when I am wrong. You are correct. Technically speaking, the proposed rule changes have not gone into effect yet. You are breaking no laws or photo.net rules. (I don't mean to speak officially for Tony or Josh, of course.) As far as I am concerned, you are free to post after Bailey, or to even rate his portfolio of photos. ;>) Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_bingham Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Sad commentary.As to the question, I think film gear has a definite place as something worth keeping - although not as a financial investment. Of course specific Leica cameras, etc could bounce back as beautiful collector's items (as they have always been). However, I have dozens of old charished cameras whose value has not even kept up with the cost of living index. This would include antiques from the 1890s. Actually, it would have been more prudent, from a financial point of view, to have sold your expensive film gear 2 years ago IF you were not using it. I did. Sure, my digital gear will lose value quickly - just like my automobiles. But I use the hell out of the gear while I have it. It serves a wonderful purpose and brings me great joy. The very reason I got into photography 56 years ago (I was 11). I do sort of miss my old darkroom days but the ease of making exciting (for me) prints from my Dell XPS and Epson 7600 more than make up for it. The coming week will make half of what I own obsolete but that's OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic_. Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 <I>�[� Z (Bailey Seals): "We'll see. Your track record is pretty poor, though."</I><P>I'm chilling all right, but that doesn't mean I bend over for poufters like you. If my record is poor, yours is the benchmark for abysmal behaviour. Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Most of the Russian LTM cameras were dirt cheap on Ebay; before 9/11. Several of the Zorki bodies with lens and case were only between 19 to 25 bucks; including airmail from the Ukarine to the USA. The "freight" was only about 8 bucks; in the pre 9/11 era. One body arrived in only 10 business days ; after I mailed off a twenty dollar bill; for the 19 dollar purchase. Today these cameras go for more on Ebay; and have freight charges way higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 <i> I'm chilling all right... poufters like you. ... Idiot. </i><p> I see you lost your sense of irony when you lost your sense of decorum. Get a clue Vikram. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Bart, don't bother to chastize me again for anything as long as you are silent to the juvenile rantings of Vikram, okay? Okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bart feliciano Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Chastizing is allowed under photo.net rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Then I chastize you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografz Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Last word. ; -) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msitaraman Posted February 1, 2004 Author Share Posted February 1, 2004 And I'll have the afterword. One of the delights of this forum is that you can ask a question, and listen to a symphony, or perhaps I should say an opera, for the answer. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 The answer is 42. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gib Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 Amen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 Help....<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 now, even.... love these fun threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 Circa 1960 was the start of the SLR revolution. In short order we got pentaprism viewing, auto stop down diaphragms, and instant return mirrors. Suddenly a used Miranda D or Pentax H2 was worth $100 or more but you could buy a clean Leica IIIC with a Summar lens for less than $50. Within a couple of years first Zeiss, then Nikon abandoned the rangefinder market. Canon hung in until the early 1970's. That left Leitz as the only manufacturer of pro grade interchangeable lens RFDR cameras on the planet. Without competition innovation stagnated and prices rose. We're going through another such cycle now. This time it's ALL film cameras. A lot of names will fall by the wayside. At the same time we should consider that Leica is still moving product and has come out with a new line of lenses over the past few years. Cosina has come out with the Bessa, essentially a consumer grade Leica, and introduced a series of high quality optics that includes some extreme wide angles that Leica wasn't making. I see a reduction in the variety of available films in the future. We saw it happen with B&W sheet films a couple of decades ago. But do we really need BOTH TMY and Tri-X at the 400 speed point? BOTH TMX and Plus-X? Probably not. Do we need half a dozen amateur color negative films at one stop intervals? Ektachromes of various contrasts? We lived with simpler choices for decades. Let's assume that Kodak reduces its 35mm and 120 choices to the number of emulsions available in 1970. It no longer has to supply such sizes as 828, 126, 110, 116, 616, 620 and a few others, so inventory is simplified there too. I suspect that we're several years away from the film market shrinking back to where it was 35 years ago, and Kodak was making money then. Over the years they've also slowly reduced B&W chemical choices and the variety of B&W papers they've produced. I'd suggest that the smart move would be to buy cameras and lenses when the price was down, just as it's the smart time to buy stocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cameron_sawyer Posted February 2, 2004 Share Posted February 2, 2004 On a more pleasant note . . . I would like to note the supremely high quality of Marc's product photography. He doesn't care how much money he loses when he sells gear because HIS gear pays for itself many times over before he gets tired of it. Unlike the case with us amateurs, his investment in gear is actually an investment, because he does something with it which produces revenue. An entirely different perspective. Kudos, Marc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted February 4, 2004 Share Posted February 4, 2004 That would be true of any gear a successful pro uses. And most successful pros don't use Leicas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gib Posted February 4, 2004 Share Posted February 4, 2004 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and locked and sealed it over him, so that he would deceive the nations no more, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be let out for a little while. 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