Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

  1. #1
    Deregistered scandal599's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Escaped from Gotham Asylum
    Posts
    563

    Default Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

    came across this in CNA

    http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...408757/1/.html

    Any thoughts?

    Will definitely want to hear those from the film era.
    Last edited by scandal599; 13th February 2009 at 12:56 PM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member zac08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    East
    Posts
    11,755

    Default Re: Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

    I learnt a lil on film... so can count??

    From the old days to the current days, I feel I learn more on digital where I am more daring to try out tricks, different ways of photography where it was cost prohibitive back in the film era. But even with multiple users holding the same camera, you can't have the same results in the end. The person with the right eye, and mind to use the right settings and edit it the way he/she wants will get the good shot.

    While the tool is there for us, we have to remember that we work it and have to do it well to get the results we want.
    Michael Lim
    My Flickr Site

  3. #3

    Default Re: Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

    Let me summarise the article:

    Some people think digital cheapens photography.
    Author thinks we should keep trying to make money from photography.


    So what's there to comment about?

  4. #4
    Deregistered scandal599's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Escaped from Gotham Asylum
    Posts
    563

    Default Re: Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

    Quote Originally Posted by mattlock View Post
    Let me summarise the article:

    Some people think digital cheapens photography.
    Author thinks we should keep trying to make money from photography.


    So what's there to comment about?
    the thing is that people from the film era have a lot more considerations in taking photos as compared to the current digital age. in a certain sense, i guess that the 'training' they underwent in film will allow them to be able to better grasp the nuances of photography. in the digital era, almost everything is based on senor technology to create the image. If the image is not good as we see immediately on the LCD, we delete it and retake the image again. In film, that does not happen. the final outcome can only be seen after the processing of the film takes place.

    While yes, there will be people who will fault digital in cheapening photography, but it is purely for interest sake that I want to know how people who underwent the film era feel about the digital revolution and was there ever a difficulty for them to transit from film to digital.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Outside the Dry Box.
    Posts
    16,268

    Default Re: Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

    Quote Originally Posted by scandal599 View Post
    the thing is that people from the film era have a lot more considerations in taking photos as compared to the current digital age. in a certain sense, i guess that the 'training' they underwent in film will allow them to be able to better grasp the nuances of photography. in the digital era, almost everything is based on senor technology to create the image. If the image is not good as we see immediately on the LCD, we delete it and retake the image again. In film, that does not happen. the final outcome can only be seen after the processing of the film takes place.

    While yes, there will be people who will fault digital in cheapening photography, but it is purely for interest sake that I want to know how people who underwent the film era feel about the digital revolution and was there ever a difficulty for them to transit from film to digital.
    dun say b4 and after... talk about now will do...

    Imagine a film outing, 1 roll 36 shots, if heng can squeeze out 38 shots in a roll. if suay, whole roll buang if the developer miscue. 1 roll of film about 10 bucks (paiseh, only shoot slides never negative), then develop fee 7 bucks.

    imagine cost of camera investment is the same, only diff is the CF card... so 1 CF card say 100 bucks... think can break even in just 1 full capacity.

    digital, most can just be trigger happy... you can see noob wedding photographers shoot 1.5k pics in 1/2 a day, 3k shots in a day, then go back home select 300 pics and give to the couple... if use film... impossible...

    also the turn around time is shorter, if say shoot without edit, can even settle on that night, if use film, minimum 2 days.

    editability- this is the most power 1... use whatever software, you can enhance the image using jpg or raw, unlike film, you have to either do it on the bigger MF/LF film or do it on the developed image like a canvas or poster. imagine duplicates... going to be pita... and scanning into computer take time...

    thats y film is not for the average users... i still love my velvia & provia...
    Logging Off. "You have 2,631 messages stored, of a total 400 allowed." don't PM me.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

    I think the author of the article started wrongly when he wrote "Digital is cheapening photography". It could mislead the reader with the word 'cheapening'. When I read the article, I noted that he was trying to present the case that digital photography has lowered the cost of entry to the professional world that now anyone can produce good photos. Because of this, the the professional photographer may not be able to make a living.

    I don't think much of the article as the arguments are quite flawed. Lowering the cost does not a professional make. Computers costs much lower than 10 years ago but does this mean that professional programmers are out of jobs? Papers and printing are also cheaper compared to the 18th century, but do we see a writer and novelist in every corner? The writer got mixed up between the tools and the skill. Yes, the tools certainly help one to get one into the hobby making the learning faster and cheaper but it still depends on the person behind the camera to produce the result.

  7. #7
    Deregistered scandal599's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Escaped from Gotham Asylum
    Posts
    563

    Default Re: Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

    of course I agree that it is the person behind the lens who is creating the images. as with the tools of the trade getting improved each day, we are seeing a lot more people carrying DSLRs around and some with lenses that some of us can only dream. I remember my first foray into photography was in the film era as well with a cheap plastic rangefinder camera that I got when I was about 8 years of age, after which it was a Pentax SLR, film as well when I was about 15.

    while it is a question of adaptability no doubt, but when I read the article, it seems that photographers from the old school are saying that the standards are dropping. Having read DCA's post, I believe that the old schoolers of photography will be saying "that is why photography is a dying art, much less a profession".

    Any thoughts?

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Outside the Dry Box.
    Posts
    16,268

    Default Re: Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

    Quote Originally Posted by scandal599 View Post
    of course I agree that it is the person behind the lens who is creating the images. as with the tools of the trade getting improved each day, we are seeing a lot more people carrying DSLRs around and some with lenses that some of us can only dream. I remember my first foray into photography was in the film era as well with a cheap plastic rangefinder camera that I got when I was about 8 years of age, after which it was a Pentax SLR, film as well when I was about 15.

    while it is a question of adaptability no doubt, but when I read the article, it seems that photographers from the old school are saying that the standards are dropping. Having read DCA's post, I believe that the old schoolers of photography will be saying "that is why photography is a dying art, much less a profession".

    Any thoughts?
    Pure photography is an dying art... as in just taking the pics with slides and show it directly as it is.

    I'm still one who say, take the shot once and get it right, miss it forget it. But most people nowadays will say, shoot 1st, talk later, if not go back do crop, else still got photoshop.

    1 shot 1 kill is a dead art, snipers are extinct...

    just go around weekends to shopping centers, esp vivocity... you can see guys just holding a DSLR walking around, some with long lenses shooting unknown kids playing water at a corner, some bringing their kids to play with the water with that no swimming sign prominently there... and they're happily snapping beside the sign. as long as something is moving, they will be snapping.
    Logging Off. "You have 2,631 messages stored, of a total 400 allowed." don't PM me.

  9. #9
    Senior Member sammy888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    1,568

    Default Re: Okay...somewhat serious thread here for consideration

    This is nothing new. Take a step back and relook at this story and relate it to almost anything in life around you. This is simply another example of people not willing to accept change.

    I am not saying change is always good but it is part of life's evolution. You can't stop it. It's about adapting to change. If you want to hold on to your romanticise view about the typewriter over a word processor, a Vinyl record over a CD and in this case a SLR over a DSLR...well..you got to accept whatever is to come for holding on to those view or value be they good or bad. Change in technology is NOT about making people lazy... it pushes the human factor to the next level. I guess that is why there is a saying about which kind of person are you?...someone who look at a glass with the water level at midway. Do you see the cup as half full or half empty?
    Last edited by sammy888; 13th February 2009 at 06:22 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •