Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Do Digital Photos Endanger History?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the what's-the-problem-here dept.

Ant writes "Experienced photographer Jayne West wrote her degree dissertation on the historical impact of digital capture. She argues that the use of digital photography in news reporting means we could lose a valuable pictorial record of history." Much of her argument seems weak to me (precisely because digital photography allows the instant culling West talks about). The digital storage itself, though, perhaps ought to make us nervous.

2 of 479 comments (clear)

  1. Re:She's concerned with good reason ... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1, Troll
    Film rots, bits don't.

    Photographers who are in love with black-and-white bug me. It's obsolete. Blah blah blah Ansel Adams blah blah blah the lighting is better blah blah fuckety-blah blah. Who cares what photographers like? I just want a fucking picture of what the story's about, mmmkay?

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  2. Tripping by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0, Troll

    this woman is insane. I used to work as a PJ and, despite carrying BOXES of film in my car boot (each box had 50 rolls of 36exp HP5), I would still get into trouble sometimes. A digital camera with a built in HDD can hold tons of pics, and AFAIK, PJs working today download via Firewire to their laptops when they get a chance. This woman's dissertation is clearly complete shit.

    --
    That was classic intercourse!