Re: The film is dead

[Jon Glass]

On Dec 13, 2004, at 1:33 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
I'd suggest that if you don't own a fire proof safe with a hermetic 
seal which
is housed in a climate controlled environment you really don't care 
for the
longevity of your film archives? :-)

Yeah, but that's a rather extreme circumstance which would destroy both 
film and digital media. I'm more thinking the daily grind, when, like I 
did recently, you accidently save an image from Photoshop back onto a 
card, thus making it impossible to use in the camera, and forcing a 
reformat. The key difference between a negative and digital is that the 
destruction with film is generally gradual, or partial, but with 
digital, it's _complete_. We all have negatives that are in quite bad 
condition, but seldom is it such that you cannot recover _any_ data 
from them. In another thread today, I posted a link to some images that 
I recovered from negatives in rather bad condition.

In any case, I would personally be glad to be wrong. :-) I just have 
this hunch. :-) Personally, while I like film, I find digital to be far 
more convenient, and use it far more than film. However, I suspect that 
film will be around for a long time, and will even make a come-back of 
sorts--but not like before. I shall, when I get the time, go read the 
threads you mentioned. Thanks for the head's up.
--
-Jon Glass
Krakow, Poland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>