Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Digital is not photography (long)
From: Curt Miller <cmiller@berkshire.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:19:17 -0500 (EST)

I think you've got the order reversed: the state of the art in digital
imaging is currently at about the development of a '32 Ford V-8...in its
infancy.  Qualitatively it's still years behind silver.  I delivered a
16x20 print to a customer this afternoon, made from and 8x10 negative.
None of these silly little desktops come even remotely close.  there's the
equivalent of 2 gigabytes of information there.  Go waste your money on
obsolete technology, if you will, but, for many of us, it's silver for a
long time to come :-).

Curt

On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, B. D. Colen wrote:

> Right....And Arthur also won't say that a 2000 Mercedes is "bad," either, he
> just doesn't want you to confuse it with the real thing - a Ford Model T.....;-)
> 
> B. D.
> 
> 
> 
> ARTHURWG@aol.com wrote:
> 
> > Paul, I'm not saying digital is "bad," exactly; but lets not confuse it with
> > the real thing. Arthur
> 
> 

Replies: Reply from "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] Digital is not photography (long))