View Single Post
Old 01-17-2004, 05:43 PM  
uptheyingyang
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: chicago
Posts: 376
been shooting film since about 1960.

had a full darkroom, with processing for c41 and e6.

sold gallery type 16x20 fine art prints for years.

and sold all my LF, MF, and 35mm film gear some years ago.

true, film is not "dead". but high end digital (even consumer digital now) is faster, cheaper, and higher quality than chemical based photography. it just plain looks better IMO.

now with certain archival pigments fine art printers can produce something that your great great grandchildren can actually look at, and it will look the same 100+ years from now.

a digital file does not degrade through reproduction, unlike photographing a photograph.

within 10-15 years the only guys using film based photography will be fine art geeks who are trying to preserve the "art" of darkroom work, the problem is their prints won't sell as well as archival prints made with pigment inks.

not trying to win an argument here, just my 2 cents.
__________________
promote our original content 30 niche site package with ccbill:
www.gashflash.com/affiliates/
uptheyingyang is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote