1st March 2014, 12:04 PM
Quite right Tool http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/20061291034093.pdf
and this shows that you can still get bw film: http://www.ilfordphoto.com/wheretobuy/bu...online.asp
Which leads back to Wessex's dictact based on Fuji stopping production of colour film as a reason to stop taking wet chemistry pictures and lumping bw in it as well? I was always under the impression that the bw film was the most preservable which was why we had to use it and meant that we had to have two cameras.
Wessex argument about archive seems a bit horse and cart:
Presumably a consideration that if colour has gone bw will go as well?!! I don't quite see how the lack of wet chemistry film make the archival format of digital equal to analogue.
Anyway the Wessex final solution:
Well does it, what cost saving do they want? For a start if they can't get any film how do you work out the saving? I don't think that digital should be compared to wet. What's possibly wrong with the reasoning behind this policy is that it's about trying to replace analogue Pictures rather than seeing digital as different. What's going on is that the whole record is going digital and will go more digital. There are no cost savings to it, we will take as many digi pictures as we like as time budget inclination takes us. At some point perma trace will disappear. At some point if it hasn't already happened the average digital video frame will be ten megapixels. At some point we will eat up the whole site digitally. At some point 3d printers will recreate your site from your picture. At somepoint someone should point out that for the vast majority of watching brief sites no one will bother or have the space to print it out and that really society was paying archaeologists to go and hide the stuff because nobody wanted it around where they lived. Yes we got used to hiding it in a museum but they are inploding before our eyes. Found this glimps of the future http://www.blackmorevale.co.uk/Archaeolo...story.html
Thats solved everything
and this shows that you can still get bw film: http://www.ilfordphoto.com/wheretobuy/bu...online.asp
Which leads back to Wessex's dictact based on Fuji stopping production of colour film as a reason to stop taking wet chemistry pictures and lumping bw in it as well? I was always under the impression that the bw film was the most preservable which was why we had to use it and meant that we had to have two cameras.
Wessex argument about archive seems a bit horse and cart:
Quote:While the archival stability of digital imaging has not yet been proven to the same degree as film,there is now considered to be no advantage of analogue over digital imaging as an archival format.
Presumably a consideration that if colour has gone bw will go as well?!! I don't quite see how the lack of wet chemistry film make the archival format of digital equal to analogue.
Anyway the Wessex final solution:
Quote:Finally, digital only photography offers a significant time and cost saving over the use of film and its adoption will therefore benefit the industry as a whole.
Well does it, what cost saving do they want? For a start if they can't get any film how do you work out the saving? I don't think that digital should be compared to wet. What's possibly wrong with the reasoning behind this policy is that it's about trying to replace analogue Pictures rather than seeing digital as different. What's going on is that the whole record is going digital and will go more digital. There are no cost savings to it, we will take as many digi pictures as we like as time budget inclination takes us. At some point perma trace will disappear. At some point if it hasn't already happened the average digital video frame will be ten megapixels. At some point we will eat up the whole site digitally. At some point 3d printers will recreate your site from your picture. At somepoint someone should point out that for the vast majority of watching brief sites no one will bother or have the space to print it out and that really society was paying archaeologists to go and hide the stuff because nobody wanted it around where they lived. Yes we got used to hiding it in a museum but they are inploding before our eyes. Found this glimps of the future http://www.blackmorevale.co.uk/Archaeolo...story.html
Quote:Entry to see the printing in the museumâs Victorian Gallery will be free with donations invited. Thats where the problem is museums are free because....Does anybody know what this museum charges to archive- this came out last year http://www.socmusarch.org.uk/docs/Archae...s-2012.pdf
Thats solved everything