mike wilson wrote: >> From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> mike wilson wrote: >> >>>He eliminated (many of) those in-camera. The point is still that >>>3000 files is not the same as 3000 prints or slides. Produce >>>equal numbers of the same end product before you tell me that >>> it is cheaper. >> >> It's cheaper because you don't *have* to produce *any* prints. > >There's something wrong with that logic. Once I work out what it is, >I'll get back to you.
There's nothing wrong with that logic because, odd as it may seem to old 20th-century farts like you and me, the print is no longer the preferred medium for viewing photographs, at least for most people. As the transition from film to digital was taking place it was widely noted in the trade publications that the number of prints being made from film was plummeting. The number of digital prints being made was rising... but not nearly enough to make up for the decline in film prints. What's been happening is people more and more thinking of a computer monitor as the "normal" way of viewing photographs. A print is something you settle for when you're forced to - like when you have to carry some around to show people where there's no computer available. The kids of today will grow up considering the print to be an optional extra. Indeed, they seem to be doing so already. Recently, I had thought that came out of the blue so unexpectedly it really startled me: They're *right* in their preference! I've always preferred projected slides to prints: An additive, RGB image always looks brighter, more vibrant than a reflective, subtractive CMYK image. It's more appropriate to the way we see. An image on a monitor is an additive, RGB image, like a slide. In the past this viewing medium has been at a disadvantage because of limited contrast, limited resolution, limited size and great expense. But monitors are getting bigger, better and cheaper all the time and the trend isn't going to stop soon (2000 x 5000 monitor resolution is expected to become common within a few years). Personally, I *love* good prints. I love making good prints and viewing them. But I'm the kind of intellectual geek who visits art galleries and spends time thinking about... well, things like this. This means I'm in a minority far separated from the average snapshooter who drives the industry. And the only time I make a print is when it's going to be 8 x 12 or larger. I think the print is almost dead as the default product of the average snapshooter and it's becoming more of a special item. But I've come to think that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
