Digital BW, The Print

Yes, I agree - well said Tyler!  It's all too easy to
shadow box and create a disagreement where none exists
by completely misquoting ones "opponent".  If we are
to disagree with one another - we should, at the 
minimum, read and comprehend what the other has said
BEFORE we react. Thanks again, Tyler, for your well
thought-out and expressed responses.

Michael Vendrell

--- Tyler Boley <tyler@...> wrote:

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote:
> ...
> > > So what? I'd argue that few but sports, street,
> or documentarions or
> > > the like should be shooting 35mm color film
> anyway. I don't know
> > > anyone that does except for snapshots, maybe low
> end retail fashion
> > > guys, but they are rightly all digital now.
> > 
> > Interesting.  I know of no high-end fashion
> photographer who is sill
> > shooting film consistently except when a P45 can
> not yield the desired
> > "print" size - which about confines it to extreme
> billboard work.  Everyone
> > I have worked with in London has moved to digital.
>  But again, each and
> > every one of us can cite different examples of
> experience.
> 
> Read Steve, read. I said they are all digital now,
> rightly, and I said low end in fact. Of 
> course the high end has mover there too, believe me
> I know. What you may not know, 
> some at the high high end still shoot film.
> > 
> ...
> > ... It would be my expectation that the
> > penetration of digital capture amongst
> professional photographers now
> > dominates, that it (unsurprisingly) dominates the
> point and shoot casual
> > observer, and that its penetration of hobbyists
> (especially the B&W
> > enthusiast) is much more mixed - but rising.  Only
> a statistically
> > significant set of poll results would confirm
> either way.  If it weren't
> > better (for whatever reasons, and I note this
> discussion was only focussed
> > on resolution, grain and the ability to institute
> gain) then its adoption
> > would likely have failed in most or all segments.
> 
> In the world I live within, the success or failure
> of a technology or product has little to do 
> with being "better", whether or not any human needs
> it, or whether or not it even works.
> > 
> > Given the trends in film production and
> particularly B&W film production,
> > film enthusiasts would do well to bandy together
> and identify a means of
> > protecting their access to this raw production
> material they hold so dear.
> > Would a niche company like MIS be interested in,
> for example, in acquiring
> > or arranging for film production facilities and
> acquiring the rights to
> > start producing specialist films such as the
> beloved Tech Pan again? (I can
> > imagine an impassioned plea to Kodak securing such
> rights for very little
> > cost.) Presumably if it's so good there is a ready
> market willing to pay for
> > such a niche product - even if it has to be priced
> at a multiple (4x, 5x?)
> > of what it once traded at? An entrepreneurial
> person, passionate about B&W
> > film, would do well to investigate such an
> opportunity if they want to see
> > the format survive.
> 
> That's almost humorous Steve. Don't worry about us,
> we'll be fine, even without ink 
> companies taking a hard left turn into film
> manufacture...
> 
> T
> 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com