I think you're being dogmatic. Who the hell said anything about "pro" photographers. As I said, to expand a bit, I know a number of "kids" in their late teens and early twenties who are fairly serious about photography, they shoot B&W, (35mm in a variety of old mechanical SLRs, mostly), for things they're serious about. Those who aren't serious use cellphone cameras. Is this for any other reason than the one that made Kodak Retina folders the in accessory with the cognoscenti a few years back. I couldn't tell you for sure, since I'm not one of the cognoscenti
Tom Cakalic wrote: > Because I think your assertion is bologna Peter. It's absurd to think that > while sales of film cameras have plumeted and sales of digital cameras has > skyrocketed, and even the vast majority of "pro" photographers have > switched/are switching to digital, that new young photographers would be > choosing film over digital. > > Heck, I like film and can't seem to move myself to use the remaining film > I've already purchased. > > Tom C. > > > >> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: FID (Film is Dead) >> Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:28:41 -0400 >> >> And why should my anecdotal evidence require more facts than anyone >> else's in this discussion? >> >> Tom Cakalic wrote: >> >>> Support your first sentence with facts please. >>> >>> >>> Tom C. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: FID (Film is Dead) >>>> Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 13:30:40 -0400 >>>> >>>> I don't know tons of young photographers, but those into the craft, use >>>> film. Those who use digital just make "reality TV" with no arr or >>>> thought. It serves them but these are the same people who bought P&S >>>> cameras. I expect that there will always be a market for B&W >>>> >> materials, >> >>>> and as I pointed out, you can make the printing paper in your bathroom, >>>> (or something like it, that is the way it was done for 75-80% of the >>>> history of what we know as photography). I will miss color slides, >>>> sometimes I do already. >>>> >>>> Tom C wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>> Film not only is, it has been superceded by an alternative technology >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> that >>>> >>>> >>>>>> has been embraced not only by the professional community, but also by >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> >>>>>> mainstream user. >>>>>> >>>>>> Film may see a renaissance of sorts, though I doubt it. More likely, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> within >>>> >>>> >>>>>> a very few years it will become so financially unworthwhile to >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> manufacture >>>> >>>> >>>>>> that even the Chinese will give up on making it, and that will be the >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> end >>>> >>>> >>>>>> of >>>>>> the line for it. >>>>>> >>>>>> William Robb >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> This is the statement I agree with most out of the whole thread. I see >>>>> >>>>> >>>> film >>>> >>>> >>>>> almost the same as I see vinyl records. There will be under 1% of the >>>>> consumer base that cares about film, even B&W film. What most people >>>>> >>>>> >>>> see in >>>> >>>> >>>>> a B&W photo is the absence of color, not the nuances that can be had >>>>> >> by >> >>>>> using certain films and processing techniques. I don't see a film >>>>> renaissance either, it's just common sense. >>>>> >>>>> Shortly the combined income of street sketch and caricature artists >>>>> >> will >> >>>>> exceed the income made by film sales and processing. >>>>> >>>>> Morbid thought... The demise of film will continue to accelerate as >>>>> >>>>> >>>> those >>>> >>>> >>>>> who use film kick the bucket, and those who have only used film in >>>>> >> their >> >>>>> childhoods couldn't care less about using it in the present or future. >>>>> >>>>> Tom C. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> The difference between Microsoft and 'Jurassic Park': >>>> In one, a mad businessman makes a lot of money with beasts that should >>>> >> be >> >>>> extinct. >>>> The other is a film. >>>> -- Unattributed >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> The difference between Microsoft and 'Jurassic Park': >> In one, a mad businessman makes a lot of money with beasts that should be >> extinct. >> The other is a film. >> -- Unattributed >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > > -- The difference between Microsoft and 'Jurassic Park': In one, a mad businessman makes a lot of money with beasts that should be extinct. The other is a film. -- Unattributed -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
