Comments on Digital Imaging to Get Better Than Film

Go to On the Edge - Add a comment - Go to Digital Imaging to Get Better Than Film

Digital v Film

Interesting developments indeed, Humayun! The Royal Photographic Society in the UK were dead against digital when it first appeared - "it's just not photography!" - but now they embrace it whole-heartedly, encourage digital work to be submitted, and teach all aspects of digital imaging and manipulation.

I'm not a passionate advocat either way, but even as a sometime-tech writer, I'm amazed that the technology already exists for digital to blow film out of the water in terms of image quality.

Oh, and if film has no intrinsic value now, perhaps Wordking could be persuaded to donate his remaining stock to a needy, skint photographer somewhere....

posted by DamonLeigh on January 17, 2003 at 3:17 AM | link to this | reply

Film

You you want to buy my film?.........I have a bout a dozen rolls. So how does my 35 mm cameras work without film? They used it before and now they don't? Perplexing...........

posted by WORDKING on January 16, 2003 at 6:44 PM | link to this | reply

They replaced film?????????????When was that?

Should I sell my camera?

posted by WORDKING on January 16, 2003 at 6:17 PM | link to this | reply

The final bell?

It took me years to accept the idea that digital could replace film. When you grow up with film, and computers provide only a pale imitation of film, it's hard to realize that pixels could one day form the ultimate picture.

Now, I know better. I noticed yesterday that Walgreen's -- perhaps as a response to digital cameras -- now offers free film, as long as you get your prints done through them. In other words, you can treat Walgreen's as a printing service -- the film itself has no value.

posted by Humayun on January 15, 2003 at 11:05 AM | link to this | reply