Things you loved that technology has killed off or r00ined.

[formulanone]

I've been starting to get into slightly more advanced photography lately (i.e. worrying about blowing out highlights more than before). My camera has a feature that flashes portions of the image that are #FFFFFF in review mode. Can't do that with film.

Nope, you can't.  And that extra challenge was part of what made film-shooting so much more fun, and the reward from doing it right that much sweeter.

But more expensive, more downtime, and frustrating if you forgot to take notes (shutter/ISO/aperture combo). Saying digital photography has ruined film photography is akin to saying electricity has ruined candles.

[ghYHZ]

Google maps replacing paper maps/atlases.  I love to collect paper maps and have them around, but for convenience and everyday use, having Google maps on a phone/ computer is infinitely better.

Paper Maps for me too......also Airline Timetables. When the new ones came out usually at the change of time twice a year......I would start at one end of the Airport Ticket Counters picking up the latest issue from each airline. Now there seems to be an updated .PDF on line every week. Just not same!

[roadman65]

How about the old style odometers on the cars.  To me I used to like watching the digits spin around and would wait for the car to turn over 10 miles, then 20, 30 etc, until the big one when the car used to turn back to zero at 100K.

Now I do not pay attention to the new digital ones nor is it any fun when the car turns over 100 thousand miles anymore.  Heck I cannot even remember when and where my car turned over that amount.  I usually run my trip meters and the only time I even flip to the odometer is when I take my car in for servicing as the mechanic needs to know how old your vehicle is and just how many miles driven for their paperwork.

Yes even motel directories that had the property locations with a small map and telling you step by step directions to the property was a peeve of mine to collect.  Now only some publish them such as Motel 6, but the many do not anymore.

[PHLBOS]

Airline Timetables. When the new ones came out usually at the change of time twice a year......I would start at one end of the Airport Ticket Counters picking up the latest issue from each airline. Now there seems to be an updated .PDF on line every week. Just not same!

The paper airline timetables were also a narrower, booklet size; whereas the PDF version can only be printed on 8-1/2 x 11s... not exactly pocket-sized.

How about the old style odometers on the cars.  To me I used to like watching the digits spin around and would wait for the car to turn over 10 miles, then 20, 30 etc, until the big one when the car used to turn back to zero at 100K.

IIRC, the last cars to offer such were the standard instrumentation versions of 2005 Ford Crown Victoria & Mercury Grand Marquis.

Yes even motel directories that had the property locations with a small map and telling you step by step directions to the property was a peeve of mine to collect.  Now only some publish them such as Motel 6, but the many do not anymore.

Sad but true.

[NE2]

the PDF version can only be printed on 8-1/2 x 11s...

Because there's no such thing as printing multiple pages on one sheet and folding.

[PHLBOS]

the PDF version can only be printed on 8-1/2 x 11s...

Because there's no such thing as printing multiple pages on one sheet and folding.

Paper timetables were typically 8-1/2 x 5-1/2 sized pages. 

When paper timetables first went away (IIRC, Southwest was the last domestic carrier to do away with such); many electronic (PDF) versions were still set up to so that each page was viewed as 8-1/2 x 5-1/2.  However, if one wanted to print such; each page would print 8-1/2 x 11 (which would leave a fair amount of white space).  If one wanted to print multiple pages on on sheet per your suggestion; the printed images would be smaller than the size of the original.

Since then several airlines have modified their formats so that either their page layouts are either full 8-1/2 x 11 (American does now this) or each page contains two 8-1/2 x 5-1/2 displays on one sheet (Delta does this).  Your folding suggestion would work with Delta's current timetables but not American's.

Other carriers' websites (I checked JetBlue & Southwest) no longer feature a full complete, printable timetable except maybe via a downloadable app for a Smartphone (true for JetBlue, not so for Southwest).

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

But more expensive, more downtime, and frustrating if you forgot to take notes (shutter/ISO/aperture combo). Saying digital photography has ruined film photography is akin to saying electricity has ruined candles.

No, but digital has killed off film just as electricity has killed off candles.  Both are still around, but are only really suitible for special purposes now.

[bing101]

I miss Typewriters!

[tribar]

But more expensive, more downtime, and frustrating if you forgot to take notes (shutter/ISO/aperture combo). Saying digital photography has ruined film photography is akin to saying electricity has ruined candles.

No, but digital has killed off film just as electricity has killed off candles.  Both are still around, but are only really suitible for special purposes now.

Is that really a bad thing?

[kkt]

You can still get beeswax candles, but you can't still process Kodachrome.

[Pete from Boston]

The advent of digital cameras has not repealed photographic technique.  Taking a good shot with a digital camera now requires most of the same skills and tricks as taking usable photos with 35-mm color slide film.  I still work with the traditional exposure rule (1/125 sec at f/16 at ISO 100 under unblocked sunshine) and I still bracket when I am unsure of exposure.

But did you learn these skills on digital or film?

The candles comparison doesn't hold up for the purposes of the conversation at hand, in my opinion, because the stakes were so much higher with film that mastering composition and exposure was more important.  It had some analogue in its relationship to digital photography to that which painting had to photography period.

[Pete from Boston]

The advent of digital cameras has not repealed photographic technique.  Taking a good shot with a digital camera now requires most of the same skills and tricks as taking usable photos with 35-mm color slide film.  I still work with the traditional exposure rule (1/125 sec at f/16 at ISO 100 under unblocked sunshine) and I still bracket when I am unsure of exposure.

But did you learn these skills on digital or film?

The candles comparison doesn't hold up for the purposes of the conversation at hand, in my opinion, because the stakes were so much higher with film that mastering composition and exposure was more important.  It had some analogue in its relationship to digital photography to that which painting had to photography period.

[lepidopteran]

Yes even motel directories that had the property locations with a small map and telling you step by step directions to the property was a peeve of mine to collect.  Now only some publish them such as Motel 6, but the many do not anymore.

Old copies of those hotel/motel/inn directories are useful for urban archaeologists trying to determine what banners used to be at a particular location.  But what will explorers, say, 20-30 years from now have to go on looking for properties from today?  Nowadays it's mostly online directories, and those tend to be updated ASAP when they change banners.  How much of a record will remain?

[lepidopteran]

No, but digital has killed off film just as electricity has killed off candles.  Both are still around, but are only really suitible for special purposes now.

When the automobile was invented, some people thought that there would be no need for horses anymore.  There are still approximately 9 million horses in the U.S.

[Pete from Boston]

Yes even motel directories that had the property locations with a small map and telling you step by step directions to the property was a peeve of mine to collect.  Now only some publish them such as Motel 6, but the many do not anymore.

Old copies of those hotel/motel/inn directories are useful for urban archaeologists trying to determine what banners used to be at a particular location.  But what will explorers, say, 20-30 years from now have to go on looking for properties from today?  Nowadays it's mostly online directories, and those tend to be updated ASAP when they change banners.  How much of a record will remain?

Old phone books are incredibly valuable in this regard, as are actual images of newspapers that include ads (as opposed to simple archives of article text). 

If you do any kind of historical research, or just want to know the full picture of what existed, all kinds of this debris is valuable.

[bugo]

In 1999 I bought a Vivitar digital camera. The internal memory held 16 high quality images or 32 low quality images. It cost nearly $200 and the pictures it took weren't great. The pictures were a whopping 0.3 megapixels with a resolution of 640x480. It took 4 AA batteries which would die within just a few minutes of use. It came with rechargeable batteries which had slightly longer battery life but they still discharged very quickly. The plastic tabs that held the battery compartment closed broke so I had to put a bunch of rubber bands around the camera to keep the batteries from falling out of it. This camera wouldn't be acceptable even in a cheap modern phone. Fast forward 10 years later and I got a Canon camera for under $150 that takes excellent pictures. It has many features the Vivitar didn't have including a zoom lens. It has a proprietary battery with a charger. The battery lasts hours. I've never discharged it completely. The 8GB memory card I bought for it holds thousands of pictures. The camera is a 10 megapixel device.

[bugo]

Yes even motel directories that had the property locations with a small map and telling you step by step directions to the property was a peeve of mine to collect.  Now only some publish them such as Motel 6, but the many do not anymore.

Old copies of those hotel/motel/inn directories are useful for urban archaeologists trying to determine what banners used to be at a particular location.  But what will explorers, say, 20-30 years from now have to go on looking for properties from today?  Nowadays it's mostly online directories, and those tend to be updated ASAP when they change banners.  How much of a record will remain?

I used to use these maps to show where routes ended or if two or more routes were 'plexed in a particular town. We didn't have Bing Maps back then so any map that showed smaller towns in a large scale were welcome.

[formulanone]

The advent of digital cameras has not repealed photographic technique.  Taking a good shot with a digital camera now requires most of the same skills and tricks as taking usable photos with 35-mm color slide film.  I still work with the traditional exposure rule (1/125 sec at f/16 at ISO 100 under unblocked sunshine) and I still bracket when I am unsure of exposure.

But did you learn these skills on digital or film?

The candles comparison doesn't hold up for the purposes of the conversation at hand, in my opinion, because the stakes were so much higher with film that mastering composition and exposure was more important.  It had some analogue in its relationship to digital photography to that which painting had to photography period.

My point was they're both still in use, but for varying purposes, naturally. However, I don't feel either "ruined" the other, only showed that they're clumsier to use towards the end purpose. While I haven't spent much time illuminating my house with candles, I have processed my own black and white film, and in class, inhaled much hypo while enduring dim red lighting, made my own prints, and even later reproduced them them on an offset press. Let's just say that's a tad impractical and an expensive proposition, though an enjoyable one for the times...but I don't miss it. Sure, early (or very cheap) digital cameras had flaky results until the advent of the DSLR, but on a second look at thousands of family photos over the years, one could say that auto-focus was really needed!

Nope, digital is far easier to collect images, the wait-time for creative improvement is far shorter and less costly to become greater, in my opinion. The weakest point is the color printer, though; however, digital sharing is easy enough. I think purists are annoyed that a camera is attached to nearly any device now, although I think technique still matters above all - some people take great iPhone pics, most aren't all that good. Some people like lomography, but many people seem to have middling results. It's all in knowing the limits of the camera, composition, balance, drawing interest, having the right opportunity/moment, and maybe even emotion (probably a few other things that I'm missing).

[Pete from Boston]

Active (as opposed to passive) social interactions.  Used to have to be a specific effort by one person to others.  Now people more often broadcast their thoughts, and recipients do the electronic equivalent of nodding back.

[NE2]

Active (as opposed to passive) social interactions.  Used to have to be a specific effort by one person to others.  Now people more often broadcast their thoughts, and recipients do the electronic equivalent of nodding back.

Nod.

Actually I'm not yet sure how true this is. Maybe in a few months I'll be more experienced.