Why is printing the de facto standard?

Started Aug 7, 2013 | Discussions thread
jkoch2
Contributing MemberPosts: 973
Like?
Kodak and Fuji wish this were the case
In reply to IceAge, Aug 8, 2013

Kodak might still be in business, and Fuji a lot better off, if this fantasy had any truth.

Even back in the Ice Age, grease pigments on secure cave walls weren't the de facto standard.  Scratches in the sand or body decorations were more common, but simply did not last.

Even in cases where there are "de facto standards," most have no reliable significance.

  • What do "man hours" tell us about production or earnings? Perhaps little.
  • What is a "batting average" if we don't know the games played?
  • What do megapixels matter, if we don't know lens or sensor quality?
  • Does camera price, or do camera specifications, tell us anything at all about whether viewers will like a picture or not?
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow