> From: Bob Sullivan <rf.sulli...@gmail.com> > > So the good old days weren't so good after all...
In general I would agree with that, Bob. In near totality actually. Prior to the advent of affordable film scanners, which I believe largely came about as a result of the WWW, and the desire to share images digitally, most photographers were stuck with using a lab - or they had to invest in the time and cost of their own wet darkroom. For me it was a lab or cheap photo processor at that time (early 90's). All of us can do so much more and with an ease unimaginable 20 years ago. I do miss the idea of buying a camera and lenses and sticking with it. For me, it was largely caring about the film specs and making sure I had a tripod and the right film, with the right lens. I loved my film scanner(s) and the ability to scan and adjust images was a milestone in developing as a photographer (pun intended). Now though, would I invest the time in scanning if I didn't need to? Likely not. However, as some have been doing, I suspect I have a wealth of unseen good or great images sitting in slide boxes, that I now may have the vision and expertise to extract. I do miss the cracking open of a canister and inhaling the smell of a fresh new roll of film. Tom C. > > On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Tom C <caka...@gmail.com> wrote: >> A few weeks ago I threw some Outdoor Photographer magazines that were >> in the garage onto the backseat of the car, planning on taking them >> with me on the plane. I thought they were all pretty recent. >> >> I had a quiet afternoon today, so I got them out and figured I'd peruse them. >> >> The first was from November 2012. >> >> I opened the second and saw an ad for a Nikon F100. Hmm, that's an odd >> camera, I thought. Turned a few more pages and saw the subtitle >> "Dominant Digital SLR". Underneath it was: "The future of practical >> and affordable digital photography has arrived. The Nikon D1 is the >> first ultra-high-quality film-less SLR (2.7 megapixels with a >> "reasonable" price tag about half of its nearest competitor).... It >> also signals where this ultra-competitive market will soon be. Price: >> $5,850" >> >> Turn to front cover to look at the date of the magazine. November 1999. >> >> Also an ad for the Pentax ZX-5N. "A low-maintenance companion... >> Aren't your pictures worth a PENTAX?" >> >> Some wonderful images and articles in that issue, including Galen >> Rowell's column regarding the eyes response to light and the golden >> hour. >> >> Many images in the issue looked modern, but I also could sense quite a >> number lacked the clarity of today's shots. Often too saturated reds, >> pinks, and yellows losing detail, with a lack of "sharpness" I'd not >> stand for today. Whether that was do to with film, no digital >> sharpening, or low resolution digital imaging I don't know. Even some >> 4x5" prints taken with a Mamiya 7 and Mamiya 645 on Fuji NPH 400 left >> much to be desired. >> >> Tom C. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > ------------------------------ > > End of PDML Digest, Vol 83, Issue 52 > ************************************ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
