At 04:37 PM 9/7/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>>>Touche' again! I remember how the race between transistors and vacuum
>>tubes, in the 1960s, was complicated by the fact that the tubes started
>>getting better. But at that point tubes were pushing fundamental technical
>>limits and transistors weren't. With film vs. digital photography it's the
>>other way around -- we know the limits of our digital materials better than
>>those of film.>>
>>
>>Tubes have made quite a comeback. They are used in extremely expensive
>>high-end audio gear, and also in recording studios in mikes, pre-amps, etc.
>>
>>One day film may also be the last bastion of the cogneseti <g>
>>
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>
>>Denton Taylor
>
>
>Gee, Denton, I hope not in the same way --a technically inferior antique
>medium sold for exorbitant amounts of money. It is like waxing nostalgic
>for mechanical calculators. There is also something ironic in someone
>claiming superior knowlege and then mispelling 'cognoscenti'.
>
>Sorry, Denton. Could not resist a little fun at your expense. ;-)
>
Maybe the joke's on you. And maybe you can't tell the difference btw a typo
and a spelling error. Would you mind showing me where in the above post I
made any claims to superior knowledge? If you refuse to acknowledge that,
for example, the world's finest recordings are still made through Neumann
tube microphones, maybe you need to do some further research.
The joke's on you--and me. We also are using a technically inferior ancient
camera. Why don't you get an F5 and put your OM1 in a display case along
with that calculator?
Regards,
Denton Taylor
_______________________________
Photogallery at www.dentontaylor.com
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|