Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-13-2010, 07:11 PM   #31
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
This is a short essay and thread on 'film vs. digital' that I really liked --> link. Posted by our own Duncan J Murray in the film section.

I don't know why exactly, but I just like that thread. It changed my ideas about film vs. digital a bit, and I liked Duncan's easy approach to the subject. (he used to have scanned images in the post that illustrated his ideas, now they're gone.)

I don't think we need to get all up in arms about the subject, the overall advantage of digital is obvious, but the OP makes good points that could be applied in different contexts, like zooms vs. primes, for example.

And I have to say that to this day the best printed images I've ever seen in my life were taken with an Arca-Swiss 8x10 film camera. Stunning resolution and color depth.


.

01-13-2010, 07:31 PM   #32
Loyal Site Supporter
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,295
Yes, I can shoot off 500 shots on my digital to find that most of them are crap, while I can grab a medium format film, and out of the 10 shots I get from a role, there will be a number that are OK. I don't it's really anything to do with the camera, it has more to do with what I am doing with the camera.

When everything is set to auto, you can work on composition but you lose control of everything else. If I set my digitial to manual mode, set the ISO myself, grab a K or Takumar lens, I am more likely to take my time and think about what I want from a shot. If you're finding digital a "crap shoot", try manual.
01-13-2010, 07:44 PM   #33
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,240
You can argue about any new technology. There was a time when there was no film over iso 100, no auto focus, no in camera metering, no color film and the list could go on. If you developed your skills in such a time, perhaps you could get along without those things, but for many, they find them useful. Today, as I chase my kids around the house with a camera, I am glad that I don't need to think about all of those things. I wonder if Ansel Adams had been chasing around a three year old, instead Half Dome, if maybe his large format photos might have suffered just a tad...
01-13-2010, 07:48 PM   #34
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 101
As I read the OP's muse I felt his "complaint" was there is more concern and emphasis over the technical aspects related to digital photography and less on the photography as art. In the "old" days there was still arguments over film grain and whether Dektol was best for Tri-X and cameras with focal plane shutters that maxed flash speed at 1/60 sec vs those with multi-blade shutter that would sync to 1/200 or faster. Film was analog and cameras were basically mechanical and the technical aspects were less influential to the process of photography.

Today, cameras are digital with auto exposure, auto focus, shake reduction, etc. There is no divorcing the technical aspects from the process of photography. They are one in the same. And this happens to be a forum devoted to the DSLR - which is a technical device.

That being said, if the OP wants to put the technical talk aside and discuss photography as an art, then he/she just needs to move to another forum. Try the Techniques and Styles board or the Printing and Post Processing board. There are dozens of other fora devoted to the "art" of photography and that may be where he/she might be happier.

I will have to say that I shake my head sometimes. I wonder if we would have seen the same postings "back in the day" had the internet been available then as we do know. Would we see the same first pictures from someone buying new Spotmatic showing two washed-out images of their dog or a series of shots of an unmade bed as I've seen on a couple of the boards here? I think after dropping a couple bucks on the roll of film and another few bucks on the developing, I doubt it as you wouldn't have wanted to waste the money on something so uninteresting. Or then again....

01-13-2010, 07:49 PM   #35
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by nuts43 Quote
Digital photography seems to have taken the fun out of the process.
What process exactly?

QuoteOriginally posted by nuts43 Quote
When before it was ok dealing with the limitations of the film loaded, or on occasion changing rolls mid-use, we could still easily concentrate on taking good pictures.
You can't concentrate anymore? That would be your caffeine intake or perhaps whatever you snort. Nothing to do with photography, anyway.

QuoteOriginally posted by nuts43 Quote
We used to know deep in our hearts, generally, what the finished picture would look like.
Deep in my heart I pump blood. Generally. And I have no problem composing images for a digital camera.

QuoteOriginally posted by nuts43 Quote
Photography used to be simpler and more satisfying. But today it is different. More time is spent on the camera than the subject.
Why has your perspective changed to focus on the gear? If you tell us more about your problem, maybe we can help you.

QuoteOriginally posted by nuts43 Quote
Film cameras do not intrude on the creative process.
Um, what? Never heard of hairs? Dust? Static discharge? Mis-dated film? Mistakes made setting ISO? Problems with adapting to changes mid-roll? Development latitude? Different developers? Different chemicals? Any and all of these could ruin an entire session.

QuoteOriginally posted by nuts43 Quote
When using a film camera, there were no double thoughts on whether we had correctly compensated for an individual cameraís shortcomings.
You couldn't have been very good then.

QuoteOriginally posted by nuts43 Quote
In fact, perusing this forumís many posts, it is clear that one is lucky to have his DSLR last a few years before it becomes a worthless piece of plastic. The loss in dollars is ridiculous.
As opposed to the loss in dollars for film, chemicals and developing?

QuoteOriginally posted by nuts43 Quote
On this forum alone, there seems to be more written concerning camera operation than producing accomplished photography.
So stop reading and start shooting.

QuoteOriginally posted by nuts43 Quote
A picture is no longer the accurate record of a split-second in the life.
If you ever thought it was, you are naive beyond belief.

But if anything, digital has brought us closer to this idealistic goal, by putting a camera in everyone's hand.
01-13-2010, 07:55 PM   #36
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bloomfield, NJ
Posts: 32
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
You can argue about any new technology. There was a time when there was no film over iso 100, no auto focus, no in camera metering, no color film and the list could go on. If you developed your skills in such a time, perhaps you could get along without those things, but for many, they find them useful. Today, as I chase my kids around the house with a camera, I am glad that I don't need to think about all of those things. I wonder if Ansel Adams had been chasing around a three year old, instead Half Dome, if maybe his large format photos might have suffered just a tad...
I think Ansel also used a Contax rangefinder and a Hasselblad SLR. They might be a tad more convenient for chasing kids around. :-) This reminds me of the small exposure chart on the back on my Rolleicord TLR. Pretty amazing you can guess the exposure pretty close with the sunny f/16 rule and knowing how much to add or subtract depending on current light condition.
01-13-2010, 10:18 PM   #37
Veteran Member
KungPOW's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,702
I think this post is a troll from APUG...

and the dude has been drinking fixer.
01-14-2010, 01:40 AM   #38
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9
"Tired of Digital Mayhem" Financial Concerns

Let us explore the digital/film financial matter. As I see it, if you spend $1,000- for a DSLR body and keep it say 3 years, maybe you can sell it for around $400-. How does this $600- depreciation translate into film and processing. I think I can buy a roll of color print film for an average price of $3- and have seen development and a medium scan for $8-. Thatís $11- for 24 exposures. If we then divide the $600- camera body depreciation by $11- per 24 exposures we get 1,309 exposures. So, the $600 loss is not really a loss at all. Who among us does not shoot more than 1,309 exposures in a 3- year period?

I would suggest that the frugal photographer shoot the hell out of his DSLR, secure in the knowledge that his money is well spent and thus allowing him to concentrate on his camera, his subject, his art and his joy, without worry.

01-14-2010, 02:48 AM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Budapest
Posts: 821
Oh, the good old days...


Civilization seems to have taken the fun out of the process. For the sake of luxury we have sold our souls to the false gods. We are no longer masters of our domain.
01-14-2010, 06:48 AM   #40
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 101
The good old days weren't so bad. I learned a lot about composition, exposure and trying to make each shot count. I'd never trade the experience of developing and printing black and white in my apartment kitchen after dark or making Cibachrome color prints by rolling the developing tank across the counter to agitate the chemicals for anything. But after I shot my first digital in 2001 with a VGA resolution camera, I made up my mind I'd never go back!
01-14-2010, 07:28 AM   #41
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
For a lot of people, the process is as important as the result, and I am sure that there are a lot of people who would rather not sit in front of a computer screen making pictures.
Why this should open the person up to the sort of childish mockery that this thread is rife with is a little less than believable.
Some of you seem to have raised the bar of digital imaging to that of a religion, and don't dare question it or you will suffer the fate of ridicule, and you will be called a dinosaur, and you will be equated with a cave man.
Grow up people, the OP was voicing an opinion regarding not really liking digital imaging, it wasn't like as if he was attacking God or anything.
Although from the tone of some of the replies, you'd think he had attacked someone's God.
01-14-2010, 08:43 AM   #42
Junior Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: GTA
Posts: 48
pros and cons.

I process my own black & white film. Load them in the canister in the changing bag, mix the chemicals, agitate, hang the developed film, etc... then clean the mess. ITS NOT FUN AT ALL, for me at least.

BUT, printing is a whole different story. darkroom prints from black & white film are FAR SUPERIOR looking over "digital photo paper" through inkjets.

I actually find digital+film to be a good combo.

When I don't need to print large, gallery-quality photographs, I use digital. 90% im only using it through the computer anyway.

When I need to print from film. I use the dslr as my sophisticated "light meter with preview" before shooting through the film SLR hehe
01-14-2010, 08:54 AM   #43
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
QuoteOriginally posted by buliwyf Quote
pros and cons.

I process my own black & white film. Load them in the canister in the changing bag, mix the chemicals, agitate, hang the developed film, etc... then clean the mess. ITS NOT FUN AT ALL, for me at least.

BUT, printing is a whole different story. darkroom prints from black & white film are FAR SUPERIOR looking over "digital photo paper" through inkjets.

I actually find digital+film to be a good combo.

When I don't need to print large, gallery-quality photographs, I use digital. 90% im only using it through the computer anyway.

When I need to print from film. I use the dslr as my sophisticated "light meter with preview" before shooting through the film SLR hehe
Processing film is the necessary evil of film photography. I found it got much easier when I invested in a processor.
I have yet to see a completely digitally captured/processed print that I like as much as what I can get from my 4x5 film camera, though some of the stitched images are coming very close in some respects.
They still aren't there in other respects though.
01-14-2010, 09:07 AM   #44
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vaughan, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 269
oh, it's THIS thread again.
01-14-2010, 09:12 AM   #45
Veteran Member
attack11's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ottawa, ON - Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 659
i've never seen a carpenter complain about getting a better table saw, or a mechanic getting a new set of ratchet wrenches.

cameras, lens, and everything else are just tools... like a computer and software. it's a tool.

love it or hate it, it all depends on what you do with it.

a lot of film shooters relied on labs to do the processing; that's like a camera generating a jpg.
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 08:33 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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