[Leica] On Both Sides

[h_arche at yahoo.com (H. Ball Arche)]

I have no problem accepting the 'reality' of digital;
I'd be a moron not to.

There is no way I'm interested in arguing for the
esthetic superiority of film, versus digital, because
that's crap. Digital is an excellent way to capture
images, for any purpose, and often much better than
film.

I just want to make the point (already of concern
among journalists and historians) that it's so damn
easy to throw away. There's even a positive incentive
for doing so - freeing up storage.

That said, I expect and hope when the time comes my
negs will be reclaimed for the silver.


--- "wildlightphoto@earthlink.net"
<wildlightphoto@earthlink.net> wrote:

> H. Ball Arche <h_arche@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > Film doesn't suck energy for its continued
> existence.
> > I doubt my film will survive the next, say, fifty
> > years, but I'm absolutely positive my digital
> files
> > won't. In the end it will be simply too expensive
> to
> > keep them alive. The history of our age is
> becoming
> > the stuff of electronic ephemera.
> 
> Do we need another film-vs.-digital thread?  Each
> has its merits,
> drawbacks, fans and detractors, and either medium is
> as real as the users
> choose to make it.
> 
> Doug Herr
> Birdman of Sacramento
> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
> 
> 
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web.com ? Enhanced email for the mobile
> individual based on Microsoft?
> Exchange -
> http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for
> more information
> 



      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs