[Leica] Where Have All the Skilled Buggy-Whip Makers Gone?

[afirkin at afirkin.com (Alastair Firkin)]

Further thoughts may well follow, but boy is this weekend becoming chaos ;-)

Cheers

--- marcsmall@comcast.net wrote:

From: Marc James Small <marcsmall@comcast.net>
To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
Subject: Re: [Leica] Where Have All the Skilled Buggy-Whip Makers Gone?
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 02:04:23 -0400

At 01:41 AM 4/10/2008, Alastair Firkin wrote:
 >Marc, this reply will require me more time and energy than I have now
 >at work, so its archived. Quick scan suggests we are in agreement and
 >I look forward to the fine print. I do agree that change has been
 >"fast" for a long time. In Radiology the 1970's ushered in an enormous
 >change however that had not occured in the 75 years previously. X-rays
 >changed and "moved", but the basic principles and the extent they
 >could be used in Medicine did not alter too quickly: 3 generations of
 >Radiologists could survive on single volume books. Ultra sound CT MRI
 >and advanced nuclear scanning has made the changes since the late 70's
 >far faster and the demands far greater "in some ways". The degree of
 >dedication is no different, but the scope of specialty has changed. So
 >its not just change, its the effect the change has. Change has not
 >spead up, but the effect of change has in my mind. So if you bought a
 >Rollei in 1950, you could and probably would still be using it in 1960
 >(OK with newer f!
 > ilm) and even if you bought another camera, it was likely to be
 >similar. You had time to pick a favourite emulsion and use it for years.
 >
 >The effect of digital on the photographic market was more overwhelming
 >than the introduction of a new film emulsion. It really was revolution
 >rather than evolution. I don't think modern work forces will use
 >skills learnt to make buggy whips for as long in their individual
 >careers, just as my skills with PHotoshop Version 2/3 are now really
 >cutting edge now.
 >
 >So I agree the rate of change may not be so much "faster" than more
 >"effective". I do believe that when I started Medicine I could carry
 >knowledge for about 10 years: I now estimate that I would be almost
 >useless in 5 if I did not keep studying and I'm sure that is the same
 >for all walks of life. I may not have to keep as much in the front of
 >my mind as the technology can "remind" me, but I have to be able to
 >use the technology
 >
 >Cheers


Thanks for your kind and thoughtful reply, 
Alastair.  The rate of technological change has 
never been even.  The main point I was trying to 
make in my long and meandering post was that 
there is always someone being gouged by technological advancements.

About a decade back, I was accused on the LUG of 
being a Luddite and I responded that in many 
regards I was one then, as I am now.  (To be 
honest, I have never smashed a digital camera, 
albeit I have inadvertently bounce-tested a bunch 
of Leica gear over the years; but, then, I am a 
ham-fisted person at the best of times.  Mark 
Rabiner can authenticate this as can Stan Yoder.)

Pray, send your further comments as I would love 
to learn your thoughts on these matters.  The 
universe has always been the same size but we are 
only now starting to understand just how large it 
is, and the way it works.  And we do have much more to learn!

Marc


msmall@aya.yale.edu
Cha robh b?s fir gun ghr?s fir!



_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information