Re: [Largeformat] Re:Digital Imaging and Sadness

[Verna Knapp <vernak@navicom.com>]

> 
> At 11:02 PM 9/5/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >Yes, it is indeed sad to see the digital evolution in imaging.
> 
> I'm not so sure it's sad.  Emulsions are, after all, pretty high technology

The sadness I was expressing was for people being forced to switch. For
those who do it of their own choice, I rejoice in their pleasure.

> -- this is simply the next phase.  I've been looking at the latest Sinar
> digital equipment, and it seems to me that -- when it's perfected, and
> about a tenth the price -- we'll find this sort of tool just as capable as
> any current large format camera.  Working with a digital back should be no
> different than working with Polaroids, in terms of process.

I got a good look at (and demo) of the Sinar digital equipment, and the 
Better Light, and the Imacon Flextight scanner, and some really gorgeous
wide format printers, and the latest and greatest Adobe Photoshop 6.0
and the latest and greatest Macs at the Seybold conference last week. I
also got a good look at the Nikon 880, and the top end camera from
Fujifilm. I saw what a good photographer could do with the Sinar back
and the Epson wide format printer with the pigment ink. It was very
good. I would agree that the technology has come pretty far, and it
needs to go farther yet. I'll only comment on the large format backs. I
quickly came to the conclusion that the technology changes they most
need is tiny, fast computers, and tiny, solar rechargeable batteries.
They are best used as studio devices because of the weight and power
problems with the current computers and batteries. However, I know the
computers are heading that way. Don't know about batteries, but it would
surprise me if they were not. For field work, I'll wait a while before I
adopt digital large format, though. My current pack is heavy enough, and
I prefer to work alone rather than bringing people to carry the extra
baggage. 

> 
> I had a huge bias against the digital image until I did a shoot in Kyoto
> with a relatively lowly prosumer camera:  the Olympus 2020.  It was
> eye-opening:  images at 4x5 were *indistinguishable* from those shot on film.
> 
> And it's not as if the old tech will ever disappear.  Look at the latest
> movement in avant retro photography:  bromoilists are coming out of the
> woodwork.  I don't think anyone will be forced to give up on film.  And
> many will do hybrid work, as they do now:  shooting on film, printing
> digitally.
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Douglas Cooper

I recently saw an article in some photo magazine or another about using
a consumer digital camera as a digital sketchpad for a large format
camera. It looked like a useful idea. Light not right, but want to
remember the scene and come back some other day? Take a digital sketch.
Also, it was being used to record roughly the same scene as the actual
large format photo, and the results downloaded to the computer for
record keeping purposes. That made a small digital camera a nice large
format accessory. 

On the other hand, all those consumers have been subsidizing the film
research we have depended on for years. Those film sales provided the
bulk of the profit for the film companies. Right now market penetration
is 10% digital, 90% film in that market. However, it is changing fast. I
see film becoming much harder to get and more expensive as less and less
is sold. If we are lucky, some small company will buy the patents of
Fuji and Kodak and create the materials we use. It will be costly, but a
world wide market of fine art film photographer could support a small
company running along those lines. If nobody does that, well, bye, bye
film. How soon? Dunno. 10 years? 20 years? Right now I'm having trouble
enough getting 5x7 color film, and that is my favorite format.

Verna