Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I think you've over stated most of this, Emanuel, including the idea that Leica was ever a camera that brought photography to the masses. In the first place, if any company or individual brought photography to the mass the company was Kodak and the individual was Eastman; the introduction of the Leica and 35 mm photography certainly had a major impact on photo journalism, but how much impact did it really have on photography processes in general? I remember that my first camera was a Brownie, not a 35 mm camera, and most people at that point were still using film larger than 35 mm. But that aside, disposable film cameras have probably done more to popularize photography, and turn it into a throw-away commodity than digital. I may, of course, be way off base, but I would suggest that the switch from film to digital may, ultimately, improve the quality of "amateur" photography by eliminating film costs and allowing people to shoot more and experiment more freely. After all, the more one shoots, the better one gets - if one has any innate ability. Sure, digital will produce billions of lousy images - but what do you think is produced on film? At least with digital the worst of the images are deleted. ;-) At this point all we really know about digital capture is that it is condemning film to niche status. Beyond that, I'd bet we're a good decade away from knowing what the impact will be on the quality of photography. B. D. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Emanuel Lowi Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 3:18 PM To: lug@leica-users.org Subject: [Leica] RE: While it is happening Just as the change in technology from cuneiform pressed into wet clay, to carved stone, to ink on papyrus, then vellum, then cheap pressed wood-fibre -- and now zapped in an instant as electrons to bluish screens around the world -- popularized writing to the point where today any halfwit can produce what appears (from some distance) to be a worthwhile tome, so photography is transformed by this digital revolution we 2004 Leicaists mournfully witness. There are far more writers today than, say, in 1500 B.C. when alphabetic writing was just catching on and the technology cumbersome. There has been a concomitant increase in the percentage of people who write things others find worthwhile to read. Give a jungle-full of monkeys a shitload of typewriters and they'll eventually write something interesting, even if it ain't Shakespeare, eh?. Making photos seems to be becoming less intimidating, and involves less commitment, in this digital revolution. No film to run out of -- so shoot away! Got a lousy shot you want no one to ever see? Button-press it on the spot, into oblivion. In time, perhaps a greater proportion of ordinary folks will make better photos. But I wonder whether the new technology really makes a big difference that way for those of us who are committed shooters already. We have our habits born in film and I'm not certain that digital's luxuries will prove a boon to us guerrilla baboons. Given that Leica in 1925 played a key role in getting good cameras into the hands of the people, one can only hope -- for the sake of traditional nostalgia, if nothing else -- that Leica sticks around for the digital ride. I still think stone carvers are cool, I only wish there were more of them out there, not just at the graveyard. Emanuel Lowi Montreal ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information