Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Got it.;-) I'm sure my head is firmly wedged in a bag of cotton candy, but I'm working on the theory that it will be possible to simply switch from media to media as times change. But then I am the rankest of amateurs when it comes to the technical aspects of the world of 1s and 0s....:-) On 1/12/06 2:38 PM, "Don Dory" <don.dory@gmail.com> wrote: > B.D., > Even I recognise the improved work flow that digital can offer. Not having > to develop film frees picture taking to a single frame of interest. > Shooting every frame with the ability to create extremely high quality B&W > with any filter required just a channel mixer away are just a couple of > reasons to make the change. Unfortunately for me, I have so wed myself to > the M's and LTM's that the other digital offerings just don't work for me; > this is a personal problem. > > So, either Leica, or Zeiss will create a camera enough like an M that I > will > be happy to shoot with it. Then, like most things in life I will take the > two steps forward with digital and the one step back with the archival > issues. It is all doable, just another set of skills and procedures to > learn and practice. As a practical matter the DNR standard will help, as > will whatever DVD format becomes dominate with 20-25 gigabytes per disk. > At > some point flash memory of some kind will become cheap enough that data > will > be kept on something that doesn't require moving parts. Also, at some > point, things will stabilize and with some common standard then the digits > will be safe as Brian's doctoral? work predicted. > > Don > don.dory@gmail.com > > > On 1/12/06, B. D. Colen <bdcolen@comcast.net> wrote: >> >> But Don, if you feel the way you do, why would you possibly consider >> moving >> to the dMI? All it will be is a another digital body, albeit a rangefinder >> that takes M lenses. But it won't do anything to eliminate about what you >> perceive as digital's lack of impermanence. >> >> >> On 1/12/06 2:06 PM, "SonC@aol.com" <SonC@aol.com> wrote: >> >>> I rest Don's Case! >>> >>> http://www.nsula.edu/watson_library/1927/ >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Sonny >>> >>> >>> >>> In a message dated 1/12/2006 12:50:44 P.M. Central Standard Time, >>> don.dory@gmail.com writes: >>> The second example is a roll of 6X9 negatives that my grandmother had >> kept >>> from her mothers family. They were images from just before to just >> after >>> the 1927 flood on the Mississippi. The just before images show boats >> on the >>> river at the very top of the levee, possibly fifty feet above flood >> stage at >>> that location. The following images are of ten feet of water as far >> as the >>> eye can see lapping at the porch of the plantation house. (When >> that house >>> was built they respected the river and built anything of >> real importance way >>> above ground) >>> >>> Today, those images will be at best on a hard drive in some >> landfill. Like >>> Sonny, I am shooting film and labeling negatives. When I move to the >> dM I >>> will have to print far more than I do now. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information