[LargeFormat] Jobo Processors and whether we will continue processing

[Verna Knapp]

Depressing, isn't it. However, all is not lost (yet). Digital has the
following shortcomings:

Cost. Constant upgrades of all the associated equipment and software,
plus original cost of the camera, plus cost of replacing the camera
when something better comes out. This likely outweighs the savings on
film and processing. I've heard that the manufacturers who remember
"give away the razor and sell the razor blades" are dreaming of single
use digital film. The idea is that you will be able to go longer between
downloading the prints to your computer or printing them on the printer
that will read the digital film. Don't count on them for storage, of
course. After a few years you won't have a device that can read them.
And they will cost about what a roll of film costs, or a bit less. 
Personally, I think that one won't fly in the market, but I've been
wrong before. 

Not archival at all. A CD is good for about 5 years before you have to
copy it. And in 5 years there probably won't be any CD drives to copy 
it with, so you will probably have to copy it to DVD before then. And 
who knows what will replace DVD, or how long it will last. I have a 
friend who says he has the first 3 years of his daughter's life on a
crashed hard drive that is sitting on his mantle. Gone. 

Even color film lasts longer than that, especially if you keep it in
the dark in a safe cool place. And black and white is very archival.

Labor intensive. All that time at the computer. And when you are done,
everybody gets to huddle around the computer screen to see the results.
Or you can print it. The inks fade really fast, though. Except for the
Epson archival inks. And I'm reading that those printers really slurp
up the ink, and don't hold up well. Besides, you have to replace that
printer when it is no longer compatible with the rest of your computer
system. You can hang on to an old computer system for a while, but 
sooner or later some critical component is going to fail, and it won't
be available any more and you will replace the system with new stuff. 
All new stuff. 

I spend my days working at a computer, so the time at the computer is
reason enough for me to stick to film. I need some variety from what
I do to earn my living.

There is better software for presentation of snapshots coming out one
of these days, of course. Microsoft and XP are heading that way fast.
Think TV viewing. Who said anything about quality? 

Quality. You gotta be very rich to get good quality. The kind of quality
I'm talking about is what we take for granted with large format film.
I remember seeing a big photo made with top of the line "large format"
digital backs and lovingly printed with Epson archival inks in a big
print. Before I knew what it was or how it was made, I looked at it and
though "mushy". Once I knew what it was, I was impressed by the "good"
quality. 

Yes, I work in the field. I'm surrounded by people who have gone fully
digital. Mostly for snapshot stuff. The one who got that expensive Nikon
5000
is a more serious photographer. He isn't happy with the hardcopy output,
though
the camera does a good job for the $1000 cost. He gets good 8x10 prints.
And
he loves messing around with Photoshop. He says that digital isn't there
yet.
And his take on it is that film will be around for a long time to come. 

Bear in mind that people who earn their livings creating new digital
devices
have to create even newer digital devices to keep earning a living. And
the
companies they work for love it if they can convince you do dispose of
the
camera you bought last year and buy a new one. A lot of the sell, sell,
sell
we see in the magazines is motivated by all that ad revenue from these
companies.
You thought those were news articles???

Verna



> 645 profesional cameras and eventually probably 6x7.  The results will be so
> good who will need large format cameras except for the movements?  Logically
> a digital replacement for the rollfilm adapter will be marketed for the
> wealthy. This means an eventual end to Polaroid and no more 'chromes and
> processing charges.  What price your sophisticated film technology then?
> Gone the way of the dinosaur, daguerreotype and dufaycolor.
> I am told that current professional digital backs take a long time to scan
> each image. Is this correct?  The Nikon above was as quick to use as any
> conventional SLR, except for its very detailed menu options which would take
> time to learn.  Strictly for the rich though. Philip

-- 
"Barn's burnt down -- now I can see the moon"
Zen saying