- Messages
- 3,903
- Edit My Images
- No
And, of course, in the aftermath of the nuclear, asteroid, climate, mega eruption, zombie apocalypse, there'll be no electricity.
...for your enlarger bulb, to print the damn negatives!
And, of course, in the aftermath of the nuclear, asteroid, climate, mega eruption, zombie apocalypse, there'll be no electricity.
...for your enlarger bulb, to print the damn negatives!
I wouldn't be so sure about that:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081027174646.htm
"According to the National Archives Web site by the mid-1970s, only two machines could read the data from the 1960 U.S. Census: One was in Japan, the other in the Smithsonian Institution. Some of the data collected from NASA’s 1976 Viking landing on Mars is unreadable and lost forever."
I'll stick with my negatives and silver gelatin prints.
I'm fairly sure that the US Census did not use Jpegs to store their information. I did not say or imply that every data format ever devised would remain usable. Compare the total size of the US Census in 1960 with the total size of the Jpeg photographs uploaded to the Interweb TODAY for a sensible comparison. Jpegs are globally important, the US Census for any year is not.I wouldn't be so sure about that:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081027174646.htm
"According to the National Archives Web site by the mid-1970s, only two machines could read the data from the 1960 U.S. Census: One was in Japan, the other in the Smithsonian Institution. Some of the data collected from NASA’s 1976 Viking landing on Mars is unreadable and lost forever."
I'll stick with my negatives and silver gelatin prints.
Because it is a standard usable format that is used a very great deal. Printing on paper is important for the same reason - most of what is printed is dross, but also most writing that is worth preserving is printed on paper. The British library is not going to have a bonfire any time soon and we should be the same with Jpegs.Why are jpegs important?
Why are jpegs important?
Genuine question because it seems to me that the overwhelming majority of jpegs are pointless diarrhoea.
H'mm wonder if they still have the hasselblad negs from the moon landing....... earth rise etc
Since the launch of the New Old Film Challenge I’ve been through quite a lot of my old negs.I have to ask ( the question refers to everyone who holds onto all their negs), how often do you actually dig any of those negatives out to "re use" / re process them?
Or do they simply lie around boxed up waiting for that day when you might be happy to still have hold of them?
They can read the formats but a lot of stuff they could have read has been junked.Yes, they will - well, not all of them. When I die, Bestbeloved is very likely to delete all my photo files but Jpeg format files will be around for centuries. Even if Jpegs come to be no longer used, archivists will need to maintain computers and software that can use Jpeg files for the simple reason that they are currently ubiquitous. For that same reason, the BBC archivists can read virtually all recording formats that have been in use over the last 100+ years even if a particular format has not been used for recording for a century or so.
..... I didn't know why I was keeping them, but now I do. There's so much about my past I'd forgotten, but re-discovered when scanning the old negatives.
Only last year I had the unwanted task of digging out old photos and negs of a friend who had died. These were pretty much before he met his wife and had a family, so they appreciated how well and happy he had looked in his younger days. Have to say that it brought back great memories for me as well, since I had known him from day 1 at primary school.^^^THIS^^^ is the reason I keep all mine, even the rubbish shots remind me of a time, a place, a person...
I didn't know why I was keeping them, but now I do. There's so much about my past I'd forgotten, but re-discovered when scanning the old negatives.
^^^THIS^^^ is the reason I keep all mine, even the rubbish shots remind me of a time, a place, a person...
Only last year I had the unwanted task of digging out old photos and negs of a friend who had died. These were pretty much before he met his wife and had a family, so they appreciated how well and happy he had looked in his younger days. Have to say that it brought back great memories for me as well, since I had known him from day 1 at primary school.
Fortunately or not, I also have bags of photos left by my mother, but at least they never kept negatives!I always believed that my mother was perhaps a bit OTT in her behaviour of hoarding "everything" like a hamster ( and I dread the day when I have to go through her affairs!), but reading back through this thread, perhaps she is what could be classed as nearer to "normal" normal than I am
I keep all my negatives.
I keep all my high res scans.
I have a copy of these scans that I work on in LR, culling and editing to suit.
I keep a full res copy of these edited images.
So, from negatives, to scans, to edited images - I have a copy at each step along the process.
Impressionate!
If it works for you then that's all that matters.
I doubt that I would be able to find the patience to occupy myself in a similar manner tbh.
I keep all of mine, with a single exception.
I will only bin a frame or cut up roll strip if it's either blank or completely unusable in it's entirety. Otherwise it's kept.
Bloody hell Jon. You must have at least twenty by now !
https://www.theguardian.com/artandd...uley-photography-retrospective-tate-interviewI have 60,000 negatives in this house and I have a really good collection of about 400 pictures I’m really proud of.
Who was it who said that 12 excellent photos a year is something to be proud of (or words to that effect)?
400 is just over 33 years worth, so not bad really!
I don’t shoot that much film now so I keep all. I do tend to use film more for friends and family so even bad ones are good ones. With digital I do delete as it gets to much to store and backup.