This is so true. With film, I just file it away and forget it. With digital, I have to backup constantly and check for corruptions. It's a chore. Also, lots of ppl use flaky CDs as backups.
That's the horrible thing about digital files. I have to back it up constantly. I've had number of files corrupted during the backup process..plus drives don't last forever. Only a few years they say, right?
Half the predictions he made, I could have made. And I know hardly anything about technology. Anyone who reads or watches the news regularly could have made these predictions.
Sophie
Oh, this game used to be so much fun and addictive.. especially on the chaos servers. But there's hardly any players left now and it's doens't have fancy graphics. Most of the regular players tend to be mean and bitchy towards newbies and just about everyone else.
It maybe beyond you but for regular ppl who don't know much about cameras or photography, they think digital is better than analog. They are bombarded ads that show how great/neat/easy/revolutionary digital cameras are and automatically think digital is better.
In terms of value, it depends on the type of photography. Digital has already driven down prices for stock and news images. Agencies like Associated Press and Reuters pay very little for images now as the market is over saturated by pros and amatures alike who are willing to sell for almost nothing. In terms of fine art, I think it really doesn't matter if it's film or digital. There are some galleries here in NYC that have embraced the digital medium and I'm sure they are selling prints at ridiculous prices.
Sophie
Here is what he said about his gear.
"Well, people have asked me what kind of cameras I used. It's hard to remember all of them. Oh I had a box Brownie #1 in 1915, 16. I had the Pocket Kodak, and a 4 x 5 view, all batted down. I had a Zeiss Milliflex. A great number of different cameras. I want to try to get back to 35 millimeter, which I did a lot of in the 1930s. Using one of the Zeiss compacts. In the 20s and into the 30s, I would carry a 6-1/2 x 8-1/2 glass plate camera -- that was a little heavy. And I had a 4 x 5 camera, then of course we went to film, to film pack, things became a little simpler."
I think he was the type that embraced technology and used every tool available to him. I think he would have at least tried and even liked it.
You can read the whole transcript here.
Experience Transcript
His Gear
Slashdot Mirror
This is so true. With film, I just file it away and forget it. With digital, I have to backup constantly and check for corruptions. It's a chore. Also, lots of ppl use flaky CDs as backups.
That's the horrible thing about digital files. I have to back it up constantly. I've had number of files corrupted during the backup process..plus drives don't last forever. Only a few years they say, right?
Half the predictions he made, I could have made. And I know hardly anything about technology. Anyone who reads or watches the news regularly could have made these predictions.
Sophie
Oh, this game used to be so much fun and addictive.. especially on the chaos servers. But there's hardly any players left now and it's doens't have fancy graphics. Most of the regular players tend to be mean and bitchy towards newbies and just about everyone else.
Sophie
In terms of value, it depends on the type of photography. Digital has already driven down prices for stock and news images. Agencies like Associated Press and Reuters pay very little for images now as the market is over saturated by pros and amatures alike who are willing to sell for almost nothing. In terms of fine art, I think it really doesn't matter if it's film or digital. There are some galleries here in NYC that have embraced the digital medium and I'm sure they are selling prints at ridiculous prices.
Sophie
I think he was the type that embraced technology and used every tool available to him. I think he would have at least tried and even liked it.
You can read the whole transcript here.
Experience Transcript
His Gear
Sophie