VCF suggestions... (film vs digital)
vp at cs.drexel.edu
Sat Aug 6 17:16:14 CDT 2005
Scott Stevens <chenmel at earthlink.net> wrote:
> ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell) wrote:
> > You do realise I paid less than that for my monorail camera. The
> > [...]
> You can buy a 4x5 'digital back' for that camera.
> You'd also be dealing with 450MB images for each shot.
EXACTLY! That is what Tony has been saying all along.
You can't get good quality pictures with digital cameras UNLESS you
want to spend a fortune for the equipment AND deal with the huge
By contrast film combines very high resolution, compact physical
dimensions, low cost, AND long life. If you add that you do not
require any additional complex supporting equipment to VIEW the
images  then you must agree that film is the best medium
for images you want to enjoy for a long time.
Having said that, I do not use film because I prefer the convenience of
digital photographs. But I understand the tradeoffs and do not go about
telling people that my equipment is better than film or that I
produce images that can compete with film.
 compare this with the CDROM or DVD drive that you will need to
read the data, plus an understanding of the encoding/format of the
directory structure on the disk and finally the encoding used for the
images. Before you say smth about jpg, note that for high quality
pictures you would want to keep them in their native (proprietary)
raw format. Given the hell that people are having to go through to recover
data from old media, there is no doubt in my mind that people will
NOT be able to view the digital images they take today, unless they
are willing to devote a lot of effort to preserve them by migrating
them to new storage and encoding technologies as these are introduced.
BTW what are you doing to preserve your VHS tapes? Remember VHS equipment
are disappearing fast from the retail market and, in any case, the ones
made today will not last for more than a couple of years anyway.
More information about the cctalk