Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Photography
The Graying Of Traditional Photography
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 215900" data-attributes="member: 12496"><p>I agree that is his point. The one part I particularly enjoyed was near the end, he says:</p><p></p><p><em>Where is photography going? Where it always gone. It's going along for the ride with popular culture. It's the traditionalists that feel a sense of loss but the sense of loss is from the constant evolution of tastes and styles. If you look at photo history you'll see generational warfare at every junction. Resistance to smaller camera formats! Resistance to color film! Resistant to SLR cameras! Resistance to automation!</em></p><p></p><p>He got that right, resistance to change old methods. All those of a certain age surely remember all of that, and I think it was his major point. </p><p></p><p>He left out the specific controversy about putting a light meter into the camera (a year or two before 1960). Nikon did not do it until middle 60s. Some of that was comparing incident hand held meters to reflected meters, and a tiny bit was about spot meters, but mostly was about how could such an embedded meter ever be trusted to be IN THE CAMERA? And then a bit later after a little acceptance, could the camera be trusted to zero the light meter, or should we zero it ourselves?</p><p></p><p>I was influenced back then to ignore color film for quite a few years, which of course was a huge and regretted mistake.</p><p></p><p>The one exception was that I think it was instead Kodaks manufacturing cost that kept pushing all the tiny film formats like disks and 110.. No one that understood anything wanted that. Those that didn't understand didn't know or care.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 215900, member: 12496"] I agree that is his point. The one part I particularly enjoyed was near the end, he says: [I]Where is photography going? Where it always gone. It's going along for the ride with popular culture. It's the traditionalists that feel a sense of loss but the sense of loss is from the constant evolution of tastes and styles. If you look at photo history you'll see generational warfare at every junction. Resistance to smaller camera formats! Resistance to color film! Resistant to SLR cameras! Resistance to automation![/I] He got that right, resistance to change old methods. All those of a certain age surely remember all of that, and I think it was his major point. He left out the specific controversy about putting a light meter into the camera (a year or two before 1960). Nikon did not do it until middle 60s. Some of that was comparing incident hand held meters to reflected meters, and a tiny bit was about spot meters, but mostly was about how could such an embedded meter ever be trusted to be IN THE CAMERA? And then a bit later after a little acceptance, could the camera be trusted to zero the light meter, or should we zero it ourselves? I was influenced back then to ignore color film for quite a few years, which of course was a huge and regretted mistake. The one exception was that I think it was instead Kodaks manufacturing cost that kept pushing all the tiny film formats like disks and 110.. No one that understood anything wanted that. Those that didn't understand didn't know or care. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Photography
The Graying Of Traditional Photography
Top