Sciencemadness Discussion Board

How will digital photography affect amateur chemistry?

I am a fish - 26-1-2006 at 12:08

Film based photography will soon be a thing of the past. Digital cameras are rapidly increasing in quality and falling in price. Photorealistic printers are advancing similarly, and most can now be connected directly to a camera, removing the need for additional hardware. Those without their own printer can easily get their photos printed in any camera store, and increasingly in other shops. Eventually it will be difficult to buy a photographic film, or to get it developed on the highstreet, and the digital camera will reign supreme.

However, I think this is good news for amateur chemists. When the general public is using digital cameras, chemical photography will be the preserve of artists and hobbyists who use the method for its own sake. Someone who used to buy and develop his or her film at a high street store will instead turn to the so-called alternative suppliers. Such a person may then see beyond the conventional methods and turn to the more exotic processes that the alternative stores specialise in.

As chemical photography becomes history, photographers may become more interested in that history. If someone uses an obsolescent method for it's own sake, they are not necessarily going to restrict themselves to the most recent incarnation of that method. Instead, they may experiment with the myriad of early photographic techniques. Such methods involve a large range of chemicals, and the demand for these chemicals may increase.

What do other people think?

12AX7 - 26-1-2006 at 14:13

I agree. You won't be taking people away from their medium very easily, so the demand will remain, as well as the supply. However, the number of suppliers, and their pricing, will most likely get worse as demand drops.

Heck, generic (not specialty) vacuum tubes are still in production -- primarily for guitar players, with a fraction going to maintaining old amplifiers (hifi or otherwise) and building new ones. This is a different analog though, because there isn't the pressure to reduce availability that chemicals get.

Tim

[Edited on 1-26-2006 by 12AX7]

woelen - 26-1-2006 at 14:15

Actually, this is the way that I became a true chemical hobbyist. I started with photography many years ago and I had a dark room. At a certain time, however, I found that the more fun chemical preparations were hard to obtain, so I starting looking around, how these were made and how I could make them myself.

Over the years this has replenished my interest in chemistry and all this photography stuff also made me pick up the hobby of amateur chemistry again, which I had as a young boy, but which I had abandoned lateron. Nowadays, I'm even more in amateur chemistry than in photography. Although I also still do photography, but more from an artists point of view, than actual chemical processing.

There also is another nice thing of digital photography. It allows me to share my experimental results very quickly. Every time, I come across a nice/nifty experiment, I make pictures and put it on my website. That also certainly adds a new and nice dimension to amateur chemistry.

joeflsts - 26-1-2006 at 19:03

I think there will always be demand for "old school" photography supplies and equipment. The down side is that I've yet to find a digitial that I like better than my 35mm. Of course every day I sound more and more like my dad.

hodges - 29-1-2006 at 10:54

There is presently some degree of demand by hobbyists and artists for the old methods. See for example the site http://www.mikeware.demon.co.uk/ (there are many others but this is just the first one that came up when I searched on the name of an old photographic process). There are companies that sell products for this hobby as well, for example http://www.photoformulary.com/DesktopDefault.aspx.

I'm interested in the chemistry behind old photography, and have duplicated some of the methods as experiments. Personally though I have little to no artistic interest so I don't generally pursue any of the old photography methods once I have tried them.

I think one area where film will be in use for a long time yet is holography. Until the time when images with multiple gigapixels can be created digitally, which I don't expect to happen too soon.

LiveWire - 19-2-2006 at 23:58

Actually, digital cameras still don't have the quality of a good "chemical" camera. The most expensive professional cameras are still chemical, or a combination of chemical and digital. (But I believe the films are positives, and not negatives)

I believe the quality is comparable to over 12Megapixels of true 12-bit RGB data (36 bits for each pixel). Note that a normal 12 megapixel digital camera can only measure one of red, green, or blue values at each pixel, and the rest are interpolated (what a ripoff, eh?). So the digital camera only gets 8 to 12 bits for each pixel.

vulture - 20-2-2006 at 13:48

10-12MP cameras match 35mm film and beat it when it comes to high ISO noise.

Medium format is a different story, although high quality digital backs are available, at a cost.

The human eye can't discern between Medium format film and 12MP+ photographs anyway, not even in lifesize print.

klashnikov - 26-7-2006 at 11:10

An advantage of the digital camera is that you can develop your own photographs without others(e.g. photo lab technician) looking at the pictures you have taken. This is important if you photograph energetic materials or chemicals that sheeple might mistake for drugs. You can also take short movies, edit, and delete photographs you don't want.

hodges - 26-7-2006 at 15:22

Quote:
Originally posted by klashnikov
An advantage of the digital camera is that you can develop your own photographs without others(e.g. photo lab technician) looking at the pictures you have taken. This is important if you photograph energetic materials or chemicals that sheeple might mistake for drugs. You can also take short movies, edit, and delete photographs you don't want.


[sarcasm]
I think digital cameras should be outlawed. After all, it is well-known that they can be used for illegal activities such as child pornography, or even worse, photographing chemical experiments as klashnikov described. These things would not have been possible for most people with the old film cameras, because most people could not develop their own film and would be afraid to take such images to the store for developing.

However, companies that make digital cameras and related accessories have such a strong lobby that laws prohibiting digital cameras are likely not be passed until it is too late.

Actually, I think you should be able to buy digital cameras, but only if you are a business and order it using corporate letterhead. And I think accessories such as flash cards and camera batteries should be kept behind the counter, and that you should have to show ID to purchase them. Perhaps a monthly limit on purchases (say, only enough to be able to take 100 photos a month) would be reasonable. People who make legidimate use of cameras would have no reason to take more pictures than this - only child pornographers and chemistry hobbyists would need more.
[/sarcasm]

Hodges

YT2095 - 27-7-2006 at 00:20

Photo shops are an excellent source for chems, some of my best/most interesting chems come from a photoshop that a friend of mine (also a memebr here) put me onto, and at the rate I buy chems, I can`t see them going out of business anytime soon :D