I'd like to do that. Been there a couple of times. My family came from Sakskobing.Originally Posted by gandolfi
come visit, and we can talk....
I'd like to do that. Been there a couple of times. My family came from Sakskobing.
come visit, and we can talk....
Joe,
I do not believe that this is human nature, but feel it has more to do with our present culture. At one time people took pride in manufacturing a product designed to last. As technology advanced, manufacturers found digital technology provided a flexible cost savings approach over traditional analog electronic designs. This simply set digital technology to be positioned to take the wrap for what followed, the rapid introduction of new products. Manufacturers realized if their future products, availing to new technologies, would be out in a year or two, why spend the money designing or supporting a product which could last 10 or 20 years.
Digital technology is just the victim here, not the culprit behind products expected to fail or be replaced by users indoctrinated by the marketing hype of "You need the latest and greatest".
To people like you and me, whose culture it is to invest in quality and use it for many years, we do not provide the cash flow that most manufacturers look for. As annoying it is to us, we also become a thorn in their side when we force those same manufacturers to support what they consider ancient technology. They actually hope telling a customer something like "go look on ebay" will make their problem go away.
This is what is the motivation behind the growth of the equipment leasing industry. Instead of purchasing something, as in your case, an office phone system, which ends up being a capital expenditure needing several years to write off, companies lease equipment. The lease term is usually based on the manufacturers life cycle of the product. If the manufacturer expects a supported product life of 4 years, get a 4 year lease. When the lease expires, the leasing company takes the equipment with all of it's obsolescence head aches, you get a new "Latest and greatest" phone system, again on lease, and the manufacturer is happy not needing to tell you to "Go look on ebay". Financially, a lease is not a capital expenditure, but becomes an operating expense.
That said, it still does not get you your spare phone handset. In my own line of work and from my cultural view point, I purchase reconditioned, formerly leased, equipment. Just like your phone system, they work fine. Two of my computer servers, when new carried a price of $50,000, I picked up for $250 each. My electronics design instruments have similar histories, one new was $20,000 which I got for $1000. The price that I do have to pay later is that I'm on my own when service or support is needed. So, I get copies of the original manufactures service manuals and do the work if and when needed.
Sorry for such a long reply to your long post, just wanting you to know you're not alone and hoping my words are therapeutic.
Hey Joseph,
I of all the people understand where you are coming from with your second point and I certainly feel with you. Perhaps some of my reasons are different, but still...It is the consumerist society we have turned into, in which fluff and "special" FX rule and substance takes the back seat if it comes along for a drive at all. Just read the results of some survey or the other yesterday - something like 84% of Americans view the military as "beneficial for the society", but barely 70% (and declining) see science as such. You are not expected to know and understand things, you are expected to consume and replace them. If you do too much of the former and not enough of the latter, you become the odd man out, a black sheep.
That kind of attitude has nothing to do with digital, one of the best photography-related manifestations of it was the concept of instant cameras. What was the slogan of the day - "You Press The Button, We Do The Rest". No need to learn or understand anything, in other words.
Which brings me back to your first point.The digiphobes love to perpetuate the nonsense about "clicking a few buttons to get the perfect print", "perfect and effortless manipulation", "so easy a caveman could do it"... No, wait,, that's something else, but it does sound good, apologies to cavemen on the Forum
Even if it were indeed so easy - it isn't, at least not a good one - and even if manipulations were never done before - they were, take "Hernandez" as a quick example - it would apply to digitally captured images all the same as to those captured on film and then scanned in. And that is how virtually all images that go to press end up anyway.
Manipulation? I have to say I love how, say modern medicine is capable of twisting and manipulating things around through digital means. Many of us wouldn't stand a real chance without it, starting with MRI, CT and onwards. Same thing with stem cell research, genetics and neuro.
While I do understand your anguish, as I said in the beginning, I also think that is peanuts compared to the larger benefits. And I consider it more than acceptable price for all the progress. Especially if it is your anguish and not mine.
d stands for dead
Live far from Sweet Home?
..'fast pace' well.. unless you're capturing with a scanning back, then outputting to Platinum (soon gum over platinum)
"To me" digital is to machine driven and way to fast pace,,,which, for many of us is the reason we use the LF equipment in the traditional form...
plus,, none of us can afford digital backs
Steve
i've captured a number of Veritos and Cooke images with the Betterlight.. if anyone wants to send me a Petzval i can mount on my Ebony.. then we can check that off as well
jim
It's not just the digitization that kills much photography. I for the first time in years bought a Photo mag, Outdoor Photography. I was impressed, well horrified really, by the magazine full of perfectly exposed and focused pictures all well framed and not one really good photograph in the whole mag.
It's almost as if they expected the camera to literally do it all. It was one of the things that decided my future path. I wanted to do photography again, as I did for years, but not like this.
I bought a Chamonix 45N. One of the smartest things I've done in years.
Interesting comment it reminds me of a time when at Chaco Canyon I was making a LF exposure when I was approached by what turned out to be a professor at the University of Oregon and in jest he say's " mine takes better pictures than yours"...he had a 35 mm camera hanging around his neck...in retrospect I think that he may have been more right than wrong since I have come to understand that large format does not a better picture make. I feel very strongly about that today as a matter of fact.
On the subject that Joseph addresses, I have been fortunate over the last several years to live a good amount of time outside the US. When I first traveled to Italy, I was in for a rude awakening. Hell all of the flash and dash of modern build it, break it, and replace it America was missing. I eventually opened my eyes and found there are still people that do take pride in building a quality product designed to do what it was meant to do with no 1 year obsolescence built in.
As an example can you imagine a home builder in America building homes with solid copper roof flashings, gutters, and down spouts (and I am not speaking of multi million dollar Mcmansions)...not on your life...How about stainless steel used for security fences around homes...You have got to be kidding.
I think America is on it's ass and couldn't find it's ass with either hand if it tried.
i think it's safe to say that most people wouldn't be able to do your work with digital *or* film. You have an amazing eye (i love following someone's homepage link and finding work like yours). If you ever have an exhibit on the West Coast of the US, please post it here.. i'd love to see actual prints.
jim
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks