Mr. Sowell,

The passing of E-6 and Kodachrome is a lot like the passing of the B-52 bomber. She was the greatest war bird ever built, bar none. She still had a lot of life left in her and as a weapons delivery platform her capabilities were only limited by our imaginations. Although I am 25 years your junior, I feel your pain. The reality is that the federal government does not exist to save money or make money; only to take our money and waste our money. Unfortunately, the arrogant feds are now wasting the brain power and capabilities of 77 million baby boomers as well.

Mac McDougall

Captain (Ret.) USAF

Gulf War Veteran

"Youth is wasted on the young." George Bernard Shaw

Like you, sir, I mourn the passing of E-6, although I do know of at least one lab (Slideprinter in Denver) which will likely be offering E-6 for a while. Like you, I mourn the passing of K-22 and Kodachrome.

But most of all, I mourn the gradual passing of film. I love my 8x10 - but it will not be long before it is impossible to find anything but a couple of black and white emulsions in any size larger than 4x5. Even that will pass, and I may still be alive to see it.

Ansel Adams will likely be spinning in his grave.

Anthony Kohler

Vietnam Veteran

187th Assault Helicopter Company

Great column, Tom - I switched to digital about 8+ years ago and have not regretted it. Digital is easy after a fairly short learning curve. But the real point of your column, more government interference where none is called for, is typical of the clowns we have in Washington. I firmly believe that many folks could be elected to office on a platform of "repeal everything". I personally would support that platform 100%.

For your upcoming digital camera purchase, allow me to recommend the Olympus E-620 if you want an SLR, or the Olympus E-PL1 for a more simplified approach to photography - but with the same chip in it as the E-620.

Sincerely,

Rob Wilson

Yes I miss the old days of E6 also, especially the 4x5 view camera.

I don't miss the time spent in the darkroom. Digital is getting better all the time.

It really is sad to think the old days of film are really gone.

dan

I'm another avid amateur photographer who, for 45 years, has been taking pictures. I finally bit the bullet three years ago and went to digital. The handwriting was on the wall when it took me all day travelling to different camera shops in the Fort Worth area to buy six rolls of 35mm color slide film to take with me on vacation. I wanted more, but that's all I could get.

Progress...technology...call it what you want. It's going to happen and nothing will stop it. I'm quite certain there were guys in the late 19th century bemoaning the passing of the "wet plate" collodion process. In "X" years there will be folks bemoaning the demise of digital photography as we know it today. Thomas does hit the nail on the head though. Get the government out of our way and let the markets figure out where they want to go.

Every columnist's job is to educate and entertain, and most of them fill that role admirably. No other columnist, however, delivers such an array of subjects. Then again, not many columnists are still working at 80. Thank god for Dr. Sowell.

For myself, the transition to digital photography was a natural one, but came with a surprising hurdle. The astonishing delay between the pressing of the button and the actual taking of the picture, said delay necessitated by all the fussy processing that goes on in the camera's brain as it prepares the camera settings to take that perfect picture. This delay, as much a second and a half with older cameras, was maddening at first, but as with anything else the human mind adapts to new conditions. Seldom do I miss a photo opportunity these days due to shutter delay.

That's partly because today's digital cameras have reduced the delay to less than a second. In fact, I've read that modern digital SLR cameras have it cropped down to a barely noticeable fraction of its former size. But even in the bad old days of a few years ago, shutter delay was not a big problem except at sporting events or other motion-sensitive photography. For the most part, a little foresight was enough to compensate for the delay.

That disadvantage was more than made up for by the ease and versatility of digital enhancement. That's a gigantic leap forward in imaging technology, rivaled only by the invention of photography itself.

But even with all that convenience, speed and digital manipulation, there's still a lot to be said for the 35mm film camera. There's nothing like holding the film in your hand, loading the film in the camera and all the other rituals of traditional photography. It just felt right.

I've gone through dozens of Camera's in my life, mostly because I love Camera's, Minolta's, Canon's, Olympus's, and, Nikon's, not to mention a few Kodak's beginning with a real Browmie.

I've had film developed all over the world, from Venezuela to Indonesia, but, never tried Digital until about a year ago. I bought a Nikon D50, and, upgraded to a D90 after I discovered how great it is to just click on the picture I want and drop it into an Email.

I take tehnical pictures of broken Parts and ship them to manufacturers all over the world that can't seem to remember ever installing that part in their equipment, and, they're able to read the Part Numbers with no problem, solving my problem (no matter how much they enlarge the image to read the number...it's readable) "...oh, yeah, we have that, no problem."

I love print images, but, I love the ease of Digital that can be printed any size that fits your need. Now, I've got to start working on my collection of Lenses.

Thank your for this nostalgic column. First, it scares me that you are 80. I have been reading your columns for many years and it seems that somewhere we must have a common ancestor or two since our thinking aligns so well but we are from different sections of the country and other significant differences.

The second thought was concerning the government getting involved with Kodak's business. There are other examples such as the processing of the 110 film in the 70's. Interesting enough, Kodak did own the photographic business but it didn't last. I was an employee for many years and Kodak management knew digital was coming and would kill the film business. In the 70's they initiated many projects to do the R&D required to be the king of digital. Alas though, the big bear in the forrest, the film business, would do it's job to keep those projects as second tier work. Kodak did not become the king and really it is a shell of its former self due to the inability to change the mind set. Others such as Sony and Canon did their work and they now rule the market. What company do we admire today that in 20 years will be a relic? Who knows but there will be several.

Our sympathy to you, Dr. Sowell. The passing of E-6 is as painfully mournful as the passing of our other important "relics" of the past--cursive writing, honesty, manners and common sense. Thanks to government for their collusion.