ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: why bother professionally ??



On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:13:12 -0000  Dicky (corbettr@dircon.co.uk) wrote:

> Do remember that death is natures way of warning the body to slow
> down.....(:-)

My wife puts it differently, and more threateningly ;)

Still, whether we like it or not (and by and large I don't), pro photography is 
mutating rapidly as photographs themselves become just another commodity with 
global distribution. You have to find some niche which adds value and, for many 
people, that requires getting involved with digital. Which in turn feeds the 
commoditisation process.

I think the reasons for all this, especially the take up of DIY scanning rather 
than factoring-out to bureaux, has little to do with technology, which needs 
only to be adequate. The real motor of change is the ability of any technology 
to transfer power and control, and with it economic advantage, up the food 
chain. 

DIY CCD scanning is cheaper and faster - not necessarily for the photographer 
but for the client. Given a choice betweeen photographer A who scans at home, 
delivers next day and can be bullied into the lowest possible price, and 
photographer B who has to wait 3 days and pay bureaux prices, A is usually 
going to look like a better deal. 

Same with digicams where relevant, where clients are anxious to gain the cost 
and time savings of no film, but not at all anxious to amortise the 
photographer's investment.

Along with the advantages of the easy, lossless reproduceability of digital has 
come the biggest threat of all: clients demanding all rights forever, usually 
for no extra fee, in order to exploit the photographs (and the photographer) 
more thoroughly.

Ultimate Quality, in photography, as well as in scanning, is a preoccupation 
for a depressingly small portion of the market - everyone has bean-counters on 
their backs now.

All of which has vanishingly little to do with the inarguable technical 
superiority of drum scanners over CCD. But so long as the latter are 10% of the 
price and do the job adequately (for clients), photographers have no choice. If 
they opt for the more expensive drums, they had better be sure their clients 
will wear the extra costs else they'll have priced themselves out of the game.



Regards 

Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & 
comparisons




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.