[Leica] Analog vs. digital

["Walter Levy" <wlevy@home.com>]

I've been following a number of recent posts concerning digital imaging.
Dominique is selling all Leica equipment and going digital by 2004.  Mark R.
is getting funky in the dark wet place.  Folks are shooting TMax, Delta,
Neopan, Tri-X, Recording Film (!) and always experimenting, having fun with
the medium.  Meanwhile some photojournalists with D1s are shooting for a
24-hour window of opportunity.

Is film photography here for the long haul?  At some point, digital imaging
materials and processes will likely become as good as the best analog
methods, and at an economical price.  A few years down the road it may well
be possible to carry your portfolio of super high resolution images in a
package the size of a pack of gum and view them at 20 x 24 on a wall-mounted
LCD display at 16 megapixels.  Still, I think there will be a place for film
for quite some time to come.  Why?  First of all, because of people like us
who enjoy the qualities of analog processes.  Second, momentum.  Film
photography has been with us for 150 years.  It won't go away overnight.
Third, no batteries required!  At least for some of us :)  Fourth, it's Art,
man!  Digital, analog... they're just tools, right?  One musician might
prefer a grand piano and another might prefer a Yamaha piano synth.  And
hey, the listener might very well not be able to hear the difference!
(Well, that's not quite true, but digital simulation of analog processes is
getting better and better as time goes on.)

As for me, I like the quality of a great black and white print.  You can't
get it - yet - with a $300 inkjet printer.  If I were publishing exclusively
or mainly on the Internet, I'd go digital in a heartbeat.  Digital scans
from negs, that is.

Well, it's late and I'm ranting, better stop and get some shut-eye.  I hope
some of this made sense.

- - Walter