Can you believe Adorama would post this?

[gr82bart]

Dead Link Removed

I would suggest Ape Huggers buy their film and cameras elsewhere....

Regards, Art

 

[AgX]

I do not have any problem with such. Adorama serves both worlds and one of their editors made his stand. And likely many readers who made that change will agree.
You are free to write something different and offer it Adorama for publication. If I remember right we got an Adorama official amongst us. She might chime in.

 

[RattyMouse]

Dead Link Removed

I would suggest Ape Huggers buy their film and cameras elsewhere....

Regards, Art

It seems very odd that they would post an article that pits their customers into opposing camps. I'm not left with a good feeling about Adorama after reading this.

 

[John Galt]

sarcasm <on>

Who is this "Adorama thou speaketh of?

sarcasm <off>

 

[bvy]

The point he misses is that it's not about "going back" to film anymore. The film versus digital argument is so 2008. At this point, it's like listening to an audiophile explain why CD's are better than vinyl. Digital has been around long enough, and we're at a point where people are experiencing and trying film for the first time. So it's just an irritant to those who have been there and still shoot film, and it's probably lost on the new generation of film shooters who grew up on digital.

Ironically though, I think articles like this do more to promote film than turn people away from it.

 

[glbeas]

The writer makes a lot of good points, but we dont do this because its easy, but because its our creativity. Tell an artist cutting a marble bust to try a 3d printer, then duck!

 

[Ces1um]

The point he misses is that it's not about "going back" to film anymore. The film versus digital argument is so 2008. At this point, it's like listening to an audiophile explain why CD's are better than vinyl. Digital has been around long enough, and we're at a point where people are experiencing and trying film for the first time. So it's just an irritant to those who have been there and still shoot film, and it's probably lost on the new generation of film shooters who grew up on digital.

Ironically though, I think articles like this do more to promote film than turn people away from it.

I agree with you. Usually this kind of article bolsters the rebels out there that want to do the opposite of what mainstream is doing. A great way to get someone to do what you want is to tell them to do the opposite. You can't argue with any of his points though, they're all true (although I have seen math that shows film is cheaper so I think you can massage the numbers to support whichever way you feel).

*edit* actually, if you look at the comments below the article you can see the film shooters really getting entrenched in shooting film. It's really stired up the ire of a lot of people.

 

[removed account4]

why wouldn't they post that ?
they are in the business of selling digital cameras to most people
probably 5000:1 ( that is 5000 digital cameras per 1 film camera USED )
.. besides it is no secret that any commercial photographer
( like the guy in the video ) who uses film for ad-work probably needs some
couch time telling dr froid about his mom.

 

[bvy]

why wouldn't they post that ?
they are in the business of selling digital cameras to most people
probably 5000:1 ( that is 5000 digital cameras per 1 film camera USED )

For that matter, then, do they really need any help bolstering digital camera sales? Crap like this does more to piss people off than sell their merchandise (digital or film).

 

[Ai Print]

Chill, it is to drive traffic to their site. I would not let a silly article stop me from ordering film from them.

 

[RauschenOderKorn]

Hey, everybody is entitled to their opinion.
I doubt that his math on the cost of printing is correct, as the calibrated system he requires is not included in the calculation,

But if it works for him ...

 

[jim10219]

It's clearly an opinion piece, not a technical white paper. There's no reason to get upset by it. They'll probably post one about why film is better, if they haven't already. Opinions aren't facts, and people used to know that. Somewhere in the last 15 years, we, as a society, seemed to have lost the ability to distinguish between the two.

In any case, the article is right. Digital is cheaper, faster, more flexible, and can produce beautiful prints. I shoot digital probably 50% of the time for these reasons. Film, however, is more visceral, methodical, and requires more skill and imagination. It's limitations breed inspiration. Plus, when you see a wonderful digital photograph, you always assume it's been computerized to death. It's an achievement of technology as much as it is the hard work of the photographer. When you see a wonderful wet print, it borders on magical. Plus the whole process that goes into making each one makes them a bit of a performance. No two will be identical. They become unique works of art rather than just well crafted objects.

 

[Bob Carnie]

those points he makes are old... I like film for the anticipation, thought process , archivabiliity , storage and just handling.. different strokes for different folks
Most of my clients use Digital Cameras so no argument on his points.

I should add that I have never used a digital camera, other than a small P&S for happy snaps so what do I know.

 

[RattyMouse]

In any case, the article is right. Digital is cheaper,

Not always. Sometimes it's not. One can buy a film camera for next to nothing as opposed to today's new Sony or Fujifilm camera that costs $2000 without a lens. Add in the inevitable upgrade 2-3 years later and the dollar value resets again in film's favor.

 

[AgX]

Or if you got already a bunch of lenses that do not fit a new body. Buying the appropriate ones new (if this is a fair comparison) likely will cost a fortune in comparison.

 

[faberryman]

The arguments on both sides are so tiresome. Will it never end?

 

[removed account4]

The arguments on both sides are so tiresome. Will it never end?

i don't think it will, until they bring codakrome back

 

[cramej]

The arguments on both sides are so tiresome. Will it never end?

No

 

[faberryman]

The poor old dead horse. No rest for the weary.

 

[michr]

I don't see anything factually incorrect in the linked article. Is it because of this person's opinion you think we should boycott a business?

 

[removedacct1]

That does it! I'm taking all of my Adorama-sourced darkroom trays out on the lawn and burn them!!!! *sarcasm*

 

[cramej]

I don't see anything factually incorrect in the linked article. Is it because of this person's opinion you think we should boycott a business?

Other than wildly inaccurate cost comparisons, you are correct that what is stated in the article isn't incorrect. He is entitled to an opinion and to share it, but it's the condescending attitude and ye olde 'film vs digital' tripe that is irritating. His angle is convenience - and probably buyer's remorse after realizing what a mistake it was to sell the M3, then getting into the digital camera loop to the tune of $3500 every few years.

He then proceeds to top off the article with a big ol' middle finger to a portion of Adorama's customer base implying that film shooters will eventually see the light and convert: "So go ahead and indulge your film fantasies. You’ll learn the basis for good photography and this will ultimately make you a better digital photographer. And then, I predict, you’ll return to the convenience of digital. See you on the rebound!"

If you look at his profile, he is a writer first then a photographer. The article got him clicks and that's what he wanted.

 

[Ces1um]

The arguments on both sides are so tiresome. Will it never end?

Not until one side crushes the other forever under their mighty heel! LOL.

 

[trendland]

Dead Link Removed

I would suggest Ape Huggers buy their film and cameras elsewhere....

Regards, Art

I can't see a real problem from that you mentioned.
And pls. do never forget : "This is a free country"
I would see indeed a great problem if anybody would talk to me so (to handle it twice).
With one exeption : If I personaly would be the one .....but don't care that will never be happen.
with regards
If films will be total discontinued or it would be higher priced in (

 

[trendland]

Sorry (Smartphone crashed) if films would be much higher priced (unrealistic expensive ) there will be a highest problem then. .....

One day we all will see this. ..
with regards
PS : Before this will happen Aliens should support all film based photograpers on earth with EMP............