Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-01-2010, 04:15 AM   #151
Veteran Member
cbaytan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Trabzon/Turkey
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,010
This subject is troll of the century, 1 year ago one roll of Kodak E100VS + processing +mailing +framing cost more than 15 USD to me, say optimistically I had 50% of success ratio, that makes 30 USD a roll. Say I shot 3600 a year makes 100 rolls, if I stay with film it was gonna cost me 3000 USD a year. I know not all of them keepers but film was gonna cost me 3000 USD a year anyway.

It's not just like that, I didn't mention the scanning costs, take your pick a decent scanner price or scanning costs, plus whole lot of time like at least 10 minutes for a decent (dust reduction ICE etc.) single frame scan.

What are we talking here, what's the point? If you wanna use film use it. Film usage is going less and less, without movie industry film would be not totally but near obsolete today. Besides why this discussion under "D"SLR thread I don't understand, IMO it should be under film thread.

My 2 cents -> OO

02-01-2010, 04:57 AM   #152
Junior Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 27
QuoteOriginally posted by Steve Beswick Quote
I don't mean to be a douche, but from reading all of those sites you've linked to, I can't see evidence, let alone conclusive evidence, that 'film is better than digital'.

Aside from the whole argument being a tad ridiculous, different strokes and all that, I can't see how those sites back up your claims?
02-01-2010, 09:01 AM   #153
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Italy
Photos: Albums
Posts: 182
The problem isn't the tool used but a good use of it.

Someone think that if you doing 500 random shoot you could obtain much good shoot?

The fundamentals are the exactly the same (yesterday and today) while I see a lot of frustration (especially from "old" user) because the digital age has brought "more competition" (often more "quantity" competition rather then "quality" competition).

The clients generally don't choose a photograph based on the quality of the shoot and this is a big problem for who want live doing photography.

Rather than complain about the digital era i think should be better complain about the customers (despite it is totally useless).
In the past the customers have less option, now they have more options (often poor quality options but however more theoretical options).
02-01-2010, 09:44 AM   #154
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 489
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
OK, but that's only because you shot with 35mm first. Had it been the other way around, you'd be used to how it comes out on APS-C, and would hate how everything was different on 35mm. It's a big huge gigantic non sequitur to get from there to "digital sucks", and all you do is look foolish making the claim and piss people off along the way.

And in any case, these are APS-C versus 35mm differences, not digital versus film differences.

The crop factor isn't the only reason, I like the almost muckyness film can have, digital is too clean.

I also shoot MF, and love the shallower DOF. I prefer shallow DOF for good part of my work, so I think if I had started APS-C, I've still enjoyed using 35mm/fullframe, though I won't deny that my opinion of film would most likely be different.

And my comment I made that was big and red............it was a joke, lighten up.

02-01-2010, 09:50 AM   #155
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,109
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
...................... There is nothing great about having your light meter separate from your camera, in fact, it is awfully handy to have it inside the camera.
If your subject happens to be a 18% grey card, you are right. If your subject is anything else then incident metering is the only completely accurate and dependable method.
02-01-2010, 09:56 AM   #156
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by Cosmo Quote
The crop factor isn't the only reason
No, but it was the one you listed first, which I thought significant.

Anyhow, no there's no point arguing the subjective qualities, like the fact that you prefer "mucky" images over clean ones or whatever. I'm just observng that posting in huge red letters that "digital sucks" based on reasons that are basically either completely invalid or else hopelessly subjective was something you deserved to be called out on. A thread like this is gong to contentious enough as it is.
02-01-2010, 10:18 AM   #157
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 489
I know digital has advantages over film, and that it doesn't "suck". It was a joke, and not based on anything.
02-01-2010, 01:41 PM   #158
Veteran Member
distudio's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Photos: Albums
Posts: 440
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
If your subject happens to be a 18% grey card, you are right. If your subject is anything else then incident metering is the only completely accurate and dependable method.
My mission when shooting digital is to optimise the capture, not put the mid-tones where they should be in a jpg, that happens in post processing on my calibrated monitor.

Histograms and blinking warnings on exposure preview allows the modern photographer to control the exposure over the whole image. It's like finally having a frame wide multi-point spot meter.

I sold my grey cards, any photographer that shoots digital who really wants to nail exposure under controlled conditions should invest in a SpyderCube - Datacolor - Global Leader in Color Management Solutions IHMO.

02-01-2010, 06:29 PM   #159
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by Steve Beswick Quote
An apology to pingflood -

I could go back and edit my previous post, but I'm not the kind of guy who covers up his mistakes.

My "pot and the kettle" comment a couple posts ago was unnecessary, rude, and just plain uncalled for. I am sorry.
Well, I'm sure I say some uncalled for things on a regular basis too. No sweat.

I looked at the links you posted and didn't really give much credence to any except the photo.net discussion which was VERY interesting. Thanks for finding that, because I've looked for something along those lines for a while and been unable to find it; people showing actual results of clearly well done testing of their own, and a LOT of debate around it. Good stuff, and I spent probably 2-3 hours reading through it. I figured that 6x7 was still at or beyond current DSLRs, with 6x4.5 being totally left in the dust. Having read through that I would say that I might have been a little optimistic on DSLR vs 6x7 and that 6x7 probably holds an edge still even with current 21-24MP FF bodies; the test used a D2X which is 12MP and I think that an increase of ~50% resolution wise will put it up there fairly close to the 6x7 scan... but not quite there. The discussion about "200MP" scans with rather questionable methodology that popped up later down that thread was a little out there and overly reliant upon some disregard of proper testing and suspension of disbelief, but most of the other posts were actually worth reading. It gets very muddy when you get into high res scans since the grain can make it look like there's a lot more detail than there really is, e.g. somebody thinking they can count line pairs when they were just inferring them from following the lines from surrounding areas etc etc... overall though, it builds a pretty good case for low ISO 6x7 film being capable of more than I've given it credit for!

Still, based on my OWN experience, I've found that unless I am shooting B&W my 1Ds II is putting out prints that are at least as good as anything I've managed with 6x4.5 -- wet prints or scan/digital prints. B&W, film does look better still, but the difference is smaller than I would've believed. Now, Delta 100 or TMX from my RB67 is really no contest still, there's a huge amount of detail in there!

So perhaps we can agree to disagree to a certain extent. I do love film (as you can see by my gear collection), but I honestly am convinced that unless I am shooting LF or 6x7 slides or B&W I am better off with my digital gear when it comes to the final output. That doesn't keep me from stuffing some TriX in one of the Leicas and having a lot of fun though, but with those cameras I am not looking for the "best" or largest possible print.

Last edited by pingflood; 02-01-2010 at 06:35 PM.
02-01-2010, 07:40 PM   #160
Veteran Member
Steve Beswick's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ontario, California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,484
QuoteOriginally posted by distudio Quote
So how is managing a hand held meter faster?
Because the person doesn't think you have taken the shot yet.
02-01-2010, 07:43 PM   #161
Veteran Member
Steve Beswick's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ontario, California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,484
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
So perhaps we can agree to disagree to a certain extent.
I can do that. Furthermore, I'll sort of help your side of the conversation by saying that the majority of my medium format work is B&W.
02-01-2010, 10:22 PM   #162
Veteran Member
distudio's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Photos: Albums
Posts: 440
QuoteOriginally posted by Steve Beswick Quote
Because the person doesn't think you have taken the shot yet.
What person?

;-)
06-15-2010, 11:36 AM   #163
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ohio, USA/ India
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 474
Your post is so funny! Burst out laughing. Would have liked to write OMG, ROFL - but alas our heart is not yet in the digital age.
06-15-2010, 11:41 AM   #164
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ohio, USA/ India
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 474
Hilarious!

QuoteOriginally posted by Kirivon Quote
Alright, for all you who feel digital has killed your creative process, I have thought up a solution!

Step 1: Acquire a single e-dial camera. A K-x will do nicely.

Step 2: Write down the correct sequence of button presses to change to a certain ISO on a piece of paper, so that you can do it blind. Write down 100, 400, 800, and 1600 only.

Step 3: Make sure that use aperture ring is enabled in the menus (you may want to write this down too, just in case), set your white balance to daylight, place the camera in RAW, and pick your favorite ISO.

Step 4: Break your rear LCD with a hammer.

Step 5: Put your camera into M and then superglue down the mode selection dial. Adorn the mode dial with either the top of a winder, or a faceplate showing shutter speeds.

Step 6: Place your AF/MF slider in the MF position and then superglue it down.

Step 7: Epoxy over the exposure comp, green, play, LV, and AF/AE-L buttons. You won't be needing these.

Step 8: Buy a whole bunch of A or FA glass.

Step 9: Throw away any of those fancy 1GB + SD cards you may have, and instead buy a handful of 32MB capacity cards. Bring only one or two extras with you when you decide to go shooting.

Step 10: Upon completion of a "roll," mail your card off to a stranger along with five bucks. Make sure the stranger batch-processes your RAW files with auto exposure settings, and sends you back a CD with poorly encoded JPGs. Make sure he also keeps the SD card.

And there you have it! The complete film experience for the digital age. Ah, I can feel the nostalgia coming already.
Your post is so funny! Burst out laughing. Would have liked to write OMG, ROFL - but alas our heart is not yet in the digital age.
07-22-2010, 01:29 AM   #165
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 263
QuoteOriginally posted by Kirivon Quote
Alright, for all you who feel digital has killed your creative process, I have thought up a solution!

Step 1: Acquire a single e-dial camera. A K-x will do nicely.

Step 2: Write down the correct sequence of button presses to change to a certain ISO on a piece of paper, so that you can do it blind. Write down 100, 400, 800, and 1600 only.

Step 3: Make sure that use aperture ring is enabled in the menus (you may want to write this down too, just in case), set your white balance to daylight, place the camera in RAW, and pick your favorite ISO.

Step 4: Break your rear LCD with a hammer.

Step 5: Put your camera into M and then superglue down the mode selection dial. Adorn the mode dial with either the top of a winder, or a faceplate showing shutter speeds.

Step 6: Place your AF/MF slider in the MF position and then superglue it down.

Step 7: Epoxy over the exposure comp, green, play, LV, and AF/AE-L buttons. You won't be needing these.

Step 8: Buy a whole bunch of A or FA glass.

Step 9: Throw away any of those fancy 1GB + SD cards you may have, and instead buy a handful of 32MB capacity cards. Bring only one or two extras with you when you decide to go shooting.

Step 10: Upon completion of a "roll," mail your card off to a stranger along with five bucks. Make sure the stranger batch-processes your RAW files with auto exposure settings, and sends you back a CD with poorly encoded JPGs. Make sure he also keeps the SD card.

And there you have it! The complete film experience for the digital age. Ah, I can feel the nostalgia coming already.
I did all this.

I didn't feel any nostalgia. I just felt stupid. Plus the stranger never sent me my photos.

Where can I get my camera fixed now?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, cameras, dslr, film, photography, picture, pictures, process
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
So so tired.............. Just12hvFun Post Your Photos! 0 08-11-2009 05:54 AM
A day in the studio! Fashion Mayhem! codiac2600 Post Your Photos! 13 12-22-2007 06:42 AM
Macro Mayhem!! [5 imgs - about 1MB] Marc Langille Post Your Photos! 36 06-29-2007 03:12 PM
Tired TrailSeeker Post Your Photos! 2 01-07-2007 07:58 AM
Tired... TrailSeeker Post Your Photos! 7 11-29-2006 01:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:31 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top