Posted by scarybarry on April 15, 2004 at 16:12:57:
In Reply to: Re: beautifull photo--thoughts on annalog technology posted by Scott on April 15, 2004 at 08:02:59:
A timely topic, considering it was recently announced that Eastman Kodak is being dropped from the Dow 30. (I hope I'm not patronizing anybody, but when people talk about "the stock market" they are usually referring to the Dow 30)
Stocks enter & exit the Dow 30 at a glacier's pace, and what it basically means is that Kodak is seen as a dying company. Unlike many old blue-chip companies trying to find their way in a changing world, Kodak has been unable to evolve or adapt. That is incredible. The writing isn't just on the wall, it's sprayed across the ceiling and the floor and out the window, at least as far as business analysts are concerned.
As a former film major and someone who used to work in the film industry and who currently enjoys DJing vinyl as one of many hobbies, I am definitely somebody who appreciates the nuances of analog. At the same time, I have little regret about the march of technology.
My feeling (and the reason for my $0.02) is that digital is also evolving, and we simply need to remember that digital is in it's infancy, while analog simply cannot be improved beyond what it has already achieved. Have you ever noticed that analog cameras have not changed in decades? Sure you've got drop-in film and panoramic settings and all that flashy stuff nowadays, but the film speed, aspects, and lenses are virtually unchanged, as is the concept of radiating microscopic flecks of iron in order to produce an image.
We perceive grainy images on film as "deeper, richer, warmer" the same way we hear vinyl records as "deeper, richer, warmer"...the reality is that these mediums were most of ours' first introduction to captured images & sound. I suspect that people born in the digital age will listen to old crusty records and old fading slides and wonder why we get so nostalgic for an obviously inferior medium, when music and images today can be perceived as "brighter, fuller, and closer to the real thing". I don't mean to step on any toes, I just think our earliest introductions to captured images & audio have biased our perception.
Post a Followup