Comments below, where appropriate: "Ryan K. Brooks" wrote: > > Boris Liberman wrote: > > >Take DVD and VHS for example. If you were a video professional, you > >might want to put your latest and greatest on DVD. For home use (such > >as recording some repeating program that happens to be broadcast in > >rather unusual hour) VHS is just fine. Now, eventually perhaps some > >device that can write DVDs in real time from your TV would be > >invented. Add to this some amazing DVD-RW and here you go. But again, > >it keeps coming, but never really comes.
> To continue your metaphor: > > In the States anyway, VCR sales are basically nil and DVD players are > considered a consumer electronics commercial success. So even if the > home VCR is alive and well, there's not any development going on and > certainly no company could survive on just making VCRs here. Most large > video rental chains here are quickly changing to DVD. That's why, when my present VHS player/recorder started going south, I looked into DVD recorder/players! Wow! Forget that! So, I ended up with a combo unit, VHS and DVD, progressive scan. I can throw my JVC VHS unit away, I can KEEP my present stock of tapes, and gradually replace them with DVD over the next couple of years. I was already lamenting getting rid of all those VHS tapes we have. Now I can keep them for a little while... > As to the realtime DVD recorders, they are here now. Panasonic, > Phillips, etc. all make versions of this theme. And they're hugely expensive, from an 'average' consumer standpoint. Just as originally CD recorders were. Now CD-RW is an every day thing. Most every budget can handle such a unit. > I think one of the big issues for those of us who like to continue to > use film will be that labs will have fewer and fewer "all-optical" > options. So if your film is scanned anyway, what's the point? Me, > I'll likely shoot black and white and self process but use digital for > everything color. > > R keith whaley
