Tear down digital photography, right here, right now

[David H. Bebbington]

Just one small observation - ask professionals about digital, and virtually unanimously they will say "Digital and analog both have their merits as working tools, sometimes I use one, sometimes the other." No controversy, no hysteria, no blood on the carpet. Ask amateur enthusiasts and ...

 

[Paul_C]

Ask amateur enthusiasts and ...

Digital and analog both have their merits as working tools, sometimes I use one, sometimes the other.

 

[Willie Jan]

1)
Digital will rule the world, but I always was one of the homosapiens that has an opinion and does not follow the crowd.

2)
I enjoy my hobby the way it is.....

 

[Andy K]

1)
Digital will rule the world, but I always was one of the homosapiens that has an opinion and does not follow the crowd.

2)
I enjoy my hobby the way it is.....

Shouldn't that say 'Digital will ruin...'

 

[firecracker]

I think digital cameras are good for moving images with sound. I'm talking about the HD video camcorders, and they are really good for making documentaries of all types for both pros and amateurs.

So, for me, digital still cameras are not really appealing from the beginning no matter how good they get. Digital still photography is not going to be my future.

 

[kjsphoto]

why I hate digital?

Anyone without a brain can do it. You push a button and the computer in the camera does the rest. No thought, not thinking, no anything. Then you have Photoshop, just fix everything later and who cares about composition or anything else. Click the mouse and make a million copies.

I don’t want to hear this crap that is takes skill with Photoshop, it doesn’t, it is a program you learn. I have taught my kids how to use Photoshop in a week and now they are really good, I have taught friends how to use Photoshop in 2 months and they rock, the point any nitwit can do it, no skill or mastery of a craft.

Traditional is where you mater a skill and the craft like a hand made print in the darkroom, coating platinum paper, painting with a brush. Using a program is nothing more than learning a tool. Digital is nothing more than graphic design. Digital cameras are computers with built in imaging devices to capture still, nothing more, nothing less.

I am so sick and tired of seeing crap image or crap ink digital prints and lets not forget the famous watercolor effect via Photoshop. If you can’t paint then DON’T! If you cant PAINT then buy paint and LEARN!

I am sick of this lazy digital world.

I am finally getting out of photography commercially all together and I quit because I realized that people don’t give a stuff about quality and I cannot and I will not compete against digital or the idiots the tout around calling themselves photographers. Sure they push a button, but that doses not make you a photographer. Just like owning a piano does not make you a pianist.

I will continue to work in LF traditionally for myself and for selling my work, other than that I am done with photography.

When I can no longer get traditional material I am scrapping all my gear into the trash and I will be done with it.

Take care guys / gals and I will stop in from time to time but I have had it.

 

[kjsphoto]

Shouldn't that say 'Digital will ruin...'

Yes,

Digital has destroyed so much, not to mention the environmental problems it is causing and going to cause as well.

And it is not only traditional photography it is killing either.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

... I am so sick and tired ...

I am always sorry to hear of someone not enjoying life, but I cannot let your arguments go unchallenged. Do you REALLY think that a pro that shoots advertising or fashion, shoots only color reversal material, never goes near chemicals and leaves it to others to prepare his/her work for photomechanical reproduction is a nitwit and an incompetent? Because this is the function that Photoshop provides, and apart from the fact that PS is electronic, it's no different from what's been going on in the PRO world for 50 years or more.

Regards,

David

 

[bob100684]

I want to know what issues you take with digital photography. What bothers you about it? What do you outright hate about it? What pisses you off about it? Do you consider it a form of photography even? If so, why? If not, why not? What disqualifies it as photography or as art or as whatever else?

...now pause for a second before you start typing...

...wait for it...

...wait for it...

Keep the following in mind: THIS IS NOT A TROLL. This is not an attempt to start some kind of flame war. In fact, the less debate in this thread the better. The instant this thread degenerates into pedantic bickering is the instant I abandon it altogether.

My purposes here are two, and I'll not pretend otherwise.

Primary purpose: to more fully understand the arguments of those who dislike and discredit digital photography, who are fundamentally anti-digital, etc. I want to more fully understand these positions so that I may better address them in my own essays on the subject (yes, that's right, I'm pro-digital, though I love film as well). I want your well-articulated thoughts on the subject. Historical and technological perspective as well as philosophical arguments are quite welcome.

Secondary purpose: to get these arguments out in the open so that we can ALL benefit from closer inspection of our own thoughts, beliefs, and inclinations on the subject. Sometimes we might even have a skewed understanding of our own views if we have not given them proper air or perspective in re the positions of others. Yes, my primary goal here is to have intellectual material for my own cogitation, but I want it to be there for the rest of you as well.

Let me say once again: THIS IS NOT A TROLL. Absolutely no petty bullshit allowed in this thread. Same goes for picking fights or derailing the thread. If you want to debate a point that has been made, start a new thread for it. In that sense, you can even use this thread for a whole new population of philosophical debates (just don't start them in this thread).

Now wait for it...

...wait for it...

GO!

Edit: And if you happen to like digital or be indifferent on it, let's hear that too.

For the most part, I truely think "the right tool for the right job" sometimes digital works out better, though at a lower quality than film.

I hate the consumer mindset though. The digital customers at my lab want their stuff back yesterday. Recently we had a woman come in back to back days. The first day was to get several dozen reprints from a negative made, which she suggested she come back the next day for. When she dropped off her digital media she was appalled we couldn't make over a thousand prints in an hour.

 

[richard ide]

Geez! Miss a thread for 26 hours and look what happens. In reading all these posts; I thought of all kinds of philosophical points to address... but what is the point? I have owned a Digicrapper for 4 months and have taken 3 imitation photographs. There is no attachment the way there is with film. In another life I made 30" x 40" Plus X negatives. Match that with digital! or deciding whether to use a 760 Apo Nikkor or 1200mm Apo tessar to make an enlargement. With analog, you have to have a great deal of knowledge to make the materials work for you the way you want. As others have said, fix it in PS. Read a manual and become an expert. Digital has no soul!

 

[BruceN]

I figured this was a troll from the start and have seen no evidence to the contrary. Why hasn't it been flushed?

Bruce

 

[BarryWilkinson]

I figured this was a troll from the start and have seen no evidence to the contrary. Why hasn't it been flushed?

Bruce

Quite agree, it has no place here.

Barry

 

[catem]

Have to agree - I saw the title of the thread and thought "oh no"...

I don't think it gives a good picture, or an accurate one, for people visiting the site.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Have to agree - I saw the title of the thread and thought "oh no"...

I don't think it gives a good picture, or an accurate one, for people visiting the site.

I actually believe Fugazi Dave was sincerely attempting to solicit opinions. On the other hand, I have to admit that the thread has only generated the usual dialog of the deaf. As to the way APUG is presented, it's a bit like the 300-pound lady who complains she looks fat in pictures!

Regards,

David

 

[BarryWilkinson]

I actually believe Fugazi Dave was sincerely attempting to solicit opinions. On the other hand, I have to admit that the thread has only generated the usual dialog of the deaf. As to the way APUG is presented, it's a bit like the 300-pound lady who complains she looks fat in pictures!

Regards,

David

Another Troll

Barry

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Another Troll

Barry

Barry, I don't have time to waste trolling - maybe you do. I refer you to my posting #108 - answer it if you care to, otherwise keep your superficial and insulting responses to yourself.

 

[Lee Shively]

I found it interesting to read the reasoned opinions of so many. Admittedly, it's tough to navigate through some of the responses and continuing arguments. It's interesting to see that many here have altered their opinions and become more accepting of digital picturing making. Most folks here are able to make the distinction between those times when digital is useful and those times when film is best. I think that's what the original post was all about.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I will certainly use digital when shooting a commercial job, and need the instant turnaround that customers expect. It saves time processing, printing and scanning, or running to and from the lab. For my personal work, however, I will stick to film, because I'm not happy with the quality of output from digital media for what I want to do.

 

[BarryWilkinson]

Barry, I don't have time to waste trolling - maybe you do. I refer you to my posting #108 - answer it if you care to, otherwise keep your superficial and insulting responses to yourself.

Your arrogance is without bounds.

Barry

 

[Andy K]

This was a civil discussion until the complainers turned up.

 

[gr82bart]

Hmmm ... why?

Why do I like my BMW and others like their Dodge Charger?
Why do I like blondes and others brunettes?
Why do I like fly fishing and others spinning?
Why do I like sushi and others not?
Why do I speak English and others French?
Why do I write in Roman text and others in Chinese symbols?
Why do I like the colour green and others the colour blue?
Why do I like women and others men?
Why do I use the QWERTY keyboard and others the DVORAK keyboard?
Why do I like the pen and tablet and others the mouse and pad?
Why do I think Osama is evil and others think he's a saint?
Why do I like playing the sax and others playing the flute?
Why do I like theatre and others like musicals?
Why do I street photography and others macro photography?
Why do I like Nikon and others Canon?
Why do I like my PC and others their Mac?
Why do I like Flash and others like HTML?
Why do I like buying and mailing a greeting card and others like sending e-cards?
Why do think 1+1=2 and others think lim f(x) = 2 where f(x) = (x-1)/[sqrt(x)-1], as x approaches 1?
Why do I like reading fiction literature and others fantasy?
Why do I like Lambda prints and others Inkjet prints?
Why do I I call an inkjet print an inkjet print and others call it a glicee?
Why do I like colour photography and others b&w photography?
Why do I like Kodak and others Fuji?
Why do I like slides/transparencies/positives and others negatives?
Why do I think this thread interesting and others think it's trolling?
Why do I think the "7 Levels" is funny self-deprecating humour and Brian (Early Riser) doesn't?
Why do I want to go left and you want to go right?
Why do I think I'm right and you're wrong?
Why do I gaze at the stars at night and contemplate the meaning of life and all that exists as a parody of sorts in the greater existential continuum and others just fall asleep?
Why do I like this smiley :munch: and others this smiley :rolleyes: ?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why does this all matter?

Regards, Art.

 

[Removed Account]

Why do I not have any coffee left this morning? :munch:



- Justin

 

[David R Munson]

Quite agree, it has no place here.

Barry

*sigh*

You guys just don't get it, do you? This is a forum - it's a place for dialogue. And, as someone pointed out, things were going just fine in this thread until the complainers showed up.

Mods...please go ahead and lock this - it has run its course.

 

[roteague]

You guys just don't get it, do you? This is a forum - it's a place for dialogue.

Sorry Dave, this is just a very sensitive topic for some. Even Sean thought it was going to go downhill fast.

 

[BarryWilkinson]

*sigh*

You guys just don't get it, do you? This is a forum - it's a place for dialogue. And, as someone pointed out, things were going just fine in this thread until the complainers showed up.

Mods...please go ahead and lock this - it has run its course.

I'm sorry Dave, yes this is a forum. However, this forum was set up to allow people interested in the wet photographic processes to discuss their interest in those processes. Unfortunately there are many who think we should include digital techniques for whatever reason. They are the one's that 'don't get it'. Many of us are not interested. I have spent the last 20 years of my engineering life in front of a PC and don't want it to encroach on my hobby.

Why do they keep trying? Are they frustrated spammers?

Barry