or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Technology Climax.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Technology Climax. - Page 9

post #121 of 199
Thread Starter 
Fountain pens are superior to ball-point pens.
post #122 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim View Post
As far as I can tell, its one of those universal truths that pretty much everyone can agree on. The camera is only as good as the eye behind it. Just because you spent 20k on a digital back medium format camera doesn't mean you are capable of taking good pictures with it. Personally I can't polaroid worth a damn. Its a weakness in my game, I know. Whether the image captured is worth capturing is more important IMO than whether its recorded digitally or with analog equipment. Its just that digital equipment gives the user the ease of use, editing, and eliminates many of the hazards of working with filmstock.
I thought we were talking about the end result: what choices you make upfront in regards to what you finally land up with. I certainly agree with you about the shooter but can't see why the choices of getting to the final product should be made on the the basis of ease or safety. Digital photography has revolutionised camera work. Digital photography is not the evolution of film, it's the evolution of the camera. Film has different qualities. Label King is in love with those qualities. Digital is the work horse, film is a lover you carress.
post #123 of 199
Thread Starter 
I don't expect "other people" to understand this love as it's like art--you either get it or you don't. Poke around the internet and you'll find all sorts of thriving self-made communities for things as diverse as straight razors to typewriter maintenance to obscure and expensive mechanical calculators to slide-rules to rotary-dial telephones. Interestingly, many of these things are loved by engineers and those with a mechanical background as they can appreciate the complexity and beautiful, thoughtful design that went into these items as opposed to the slap-dash plastic mess one calls "exciting technology" these days. Typewriters: http://willdavis.bravehost.com/index.html Expensive Curta calculator: http://www.vcalc.net/cu.htm Slide-rules: http://www.sliderule.ca/ Telephone Collectors: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/singingwires/ These people seek out various ways to preserve the traditions and even going to great expense to do it--I know of some people who took out mortgages in order to maintain their '60s Mercedes-Benz 600s. Benz M-100 Group: http://www.m-100.cc/
post #124 of 199
Thread Starter 
On another aside, a wealthy individual who goes out and buys say, an original Jean Prouve, or a 1960s Maserati is far less endearing than a middle-class person who saves up for that special Gio Ponti desk or Val St.Lambert vase. Such as this: http://www.designcommunity.com/discussion/28132.html One merely shows wealth buying taste and the other shows true dedication.
post #125 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
Fountain pens are superior to ball-point pens.

Don't even get me started!

You can also convincingly argue that old fountain pens are superior to new ones, at least in terms of their nibs. In the case of Montblanc, that is true of overall quality.
post #126 of 199
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nantucket Red View Post
Don't even get me started! You can also convincingly argue that old fountain pens are superior to new ones, at least in terms of their nibs. In the case of Montblanc, that is true of overall quality.
Oh surely. One time I stumbled upon a bit of a controversial discussion on a Fountain Pen board. It concerned a person who adamantly believed that no one should touch or "customize" vintage nibs because they were special and nothing could ever be made to duplicate them. Ball-points depress me, ever like reminders of the DMW or other unpleasant "human-contact" places like that.
post #127 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
Oh surely.

Please don't call me Shirley!

Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
One time I stumbled upon a bit of a controversial discussion on a Fountain Pen board. It concerned a person who adamantly believed that no one should touch or "customize" vintage nibs because they were special and nothing could ever be made to duplicate them.

By the same logic, you shouldn't get broken nibs restored, which is an absurd proposal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
Ball-points depress me, ever like reminders of the DMW or other unpleasant "human-contact" places like that.

Disposable ballpoints have habituated entire generations not to value either their pens or penmanship. Now everyone's handwriting resembles a doctor's writing on a prescription.
post #128 of 199
caelte, I find it a condescending position to consider digital as a "workhorse" method. I *love* working on photos in Photoshop. I can guarantee you that it is just as much a precious art form as working in film. As for the quality of analog vs. digital, even my meager $1200 camera can make huge prints that are as as sharp as any analog prints I've seen. Of course if you want really perfect pictures just get a medium format.
post #129 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian SD View Post
caelte, I find it a condescending position to consider digital as a "workhorse" method. I *love* working on photos in Photoshop. I can guarantee you that it is just as much a precious art form as working in film. As for the quality of analog vs. digital, even my meager $1200 camera can make huge prints that are as as sharp as any analog prints I've seen. Of course if you want really perfect pictures just get a medium format.
Jeez, condescending...no, no, I use digital to do my own shots. It would take forever to do them with film. What I mean regarding "workhorse": Digital has replaced film as an idustry standard. Hardly anyone uses it anymore. I know there are commercial photographers who use film, but I can't imagine there being many. My point about film is: It is a separate art form from digital and produces a different final effect. Digital has freed film from it's work duties. For me, the process involved is as important as the final product. TS was implying a choice based on ease of use, for those users, digital is the right choice. The analog process is closer to the source of the art, it's a hand made art. Digital feels more removed, your directing robotic actions. What really bothers me about digital vs. analog: in the analog age it was difficult to alter images, now it's a seamless process. The analog age carried with it a historical element of truth in the image. From now on, because of photoshop, images will no longer be regarded as being truthful. This is a collossal loss that I've not seen discussed. In addition, so may digital snapshots will be deleted,in the future, we won't get to see much of everyday life in the past. Those piles of old film negatives contain a priceless knowledge. I know enough about you from reading your posts to know you understand the "love". P.S. If you get a chance, look at an original dagguereotype with a magnifying glass. There is no grain. It's like looking out the window of a time machine.
post #130 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nantucket Red View Post
I've heard that Chandigarh is also less than a smashing success.

Built on a grid, right?
post #131 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
Now, it costs $619 to have your oil changed on a Porsche--and a computer to diagnose the engine.

No it doesn't, and you can even do it yourself. OBD2 readers can be had relatively cheap, too, if you want to talk to the computer.

--Andre
post #132 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
No it doesn't, and you can even do it yourself. OBD2 readers can be had relatively cheap, too, if you want to talk to the computer. --Andre
Is it true you have to drop the engine on a Boxter to change the plugs?
post #133 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by caelte View Post
Is it true you have to drop the engine on a Boxter to change the plugs?

Not true. You do have to remove the rear wheels.

--Andre
post #134 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian SD View Post
As an aside:
Dkzzz, you suck, BLOW UP is a great movie. You totally missed the point if all you could concentrate on is how they wore skinny ties, slim jeans and fitted jackets.

I must have missed its point. What was it? Seriously I'd appreciate if you tell me.
post #135 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim View Post
Your sentimentality for something you never even lived through in the first place is weird. Did you just roll a die to figure out which affectations you'd develop to make yourself stand out, or is there some sort of sinister abuse story behind it all?

Your misinformed opinions on digital photography are laughable. Bringing up the 2MP cameras of 8 years ago is like bringing up 16mm film. The current batch of digital cameras will be useful for a long, long time. Why? because they satisfy the needs of 99.9% of the consumers in the world. Aside from hobbyists, 35mm film photography is dead. Unless you are blowing images up to wall size an 8-10MP camera is indistinguishable from film at any standard size print.

Mixing your own chemicals for a darkroom is initially about 10x as expensive as taking it to the photomat, its messy, you need a place to store everything, and you need to take drastic measures to make sure your solutions don't go bad. Most photographers are never going to do it. Over the long run it is cheaper than taking your film to Costco or One Hour Film or whatever, but still isn't as cost effective as printing out your own on the computer. And it CERTAINLY isn't as time effective. You also have that wasted money problem, having to develop negatives of pictures you are never going to use.

My main problem in the last paragraph is that you think technology "peaks". It doesn't.

If we are talking about amateur photographers who store pictures on computer and e-mail them to their friends then yes digital is the way to go.

1. For commercial photography in controlled-light environment., yes digital is more quick and cost effective.

2. For every other application analog is so far superior in resolution and photo-sensitivity that I don't even know where to begin.

Have you heard of 54MP digital cameras? Well that is what you need to match the resolution of analog and then photosens. still remains a problem.

It is the same delusion as with HDTV plasma or LCD. They are not better than catode tubes they are much much worse.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Technology Climax.