FotoDave@aol.com
Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:11:37 -0400 (EDT)
In a message dated 4/21/99 5:01:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jseigel@panix.com writes:
> I've been led to think that our APH and APHS lith are made
> or also used for digital exposure.
Hi Judy,
I wasn't sure about that although at one point I thought so because the
service bureau told me they just use developer and fixer, so it sounds pretty
ordinary to me although recent thread shows that some companies might be
making special film for imagesetters.
> If that dies, so could the film.. ??? Anybody know more on that? Dave???
I think that the direct-to-plate technology covers a big chunk of printing
market, but there must be some other areas that needs film, not just plate.
If imagesetter truly dies, then they will need to make the film
themselves.... maybe they will go back to camera. Or maybe the direct plate
exposure can also expose film. Or maybe they will (very likely) come out with
blacker ink for large-format print so that for simple output (eg. for silk
screen), one can use the printer.
What I was trying to say was while we all know that digital/computer imaging
is here and will stay, its effect on film availability and its effect on
fine-art photographers might not be as straightforward as one thinks. It is
probably more market driven than logical. Maybe digital will push us back to
use film and enlarger (probably digital enlarger will become cheap)....
But I don't really know. I am not a prophet although I did tell you that my
2nd or 3rd gum print looked better than the "False Prophet." :)
Dave S
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:39:32