[indian101scout]

December 20, 2011 at 2:11 am

Here is the original. It was December, cold and stormy.

[indian101scout]

December 18, 2011 at 10:32 pm

I guess you’re right, but let me put it this way – digital is going to kill photography the way it was thought photography would kill painting. It didn’t. It made it better, conceptually and aesthetically. The passage from the book may be more or less right, but the conclusion he draws, in my opinion, is dead wrong. Digital will make photography (and photographers) better.

[indian101scout]

December 17, 2011 at 3:41 am

One of the very core values of the grad program I am in is this is NOT the case. Photography is just going through a period of redefining itself, or more accurately – photography is being redefined by photographers. I firmly believe that the handmade image will be the future of art photography, as digital imagery (and the technology that can produce it) levels the playing field, elevating the average and boring the truly creative, who will go looking elsewhere for interesting imagery.

[indian101scout]

December 17, 2011 at 3:34 am

I too have an Epson, the V700. I figured I did not need the wet scan option and the software differences were not enough for me to pay up for the 750. I shoot film exclusively and scan everything. It is a great, reliable workhorse, and good for old print scanning too. I have scanned old prints and made digital negs for alternative process printing and they have turned out great! It’s especially nice if you are going to be printing on Epson printers too, they all speak the same language!