Jump to content


Photo

Digital vs. Film


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

Poll: What relationship does Digital vs. Film have for you? (51 member(s) have cast votes)

What relationship does Digital vs. Film have for you?

  1. I shoot BOTH Digital and Film (23 votes [45.10%])

    Percentage of vote: 45.10%

  2. I shoot DIGITAL only (27 votes [52.94%])

    Percentage of vote: 52.94%

  3. I shoot FILM only (1 votes [1.96%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.96%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#31 Gary Poole

Gary Poole

    Planet Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 672 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SE Michigan, USA

Posted 05 January 2007 - 06:57 PM

Gary, My vote was for both film and digital as I use both and see the values of both. My affinity for filn echoes my affinity for photography. Both are extremely relevant. My own PERSONAL feeling is that the learning process of photography is better if one learns both.

Sorry, the way I read your post, I interpreted it that you used only film. :o Am I the only non digital user on Planet Nikon? :rolleyes:
Gary in SE Michigan, USA
D4, D810, D300 (720nm IR), D90, F6, FM3a (black), FM2n (chrome)
YashicaMat 124, Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5

#32 photojazz

photojazz

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19274 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philly
  • Interests:Photography, Photography, , More Photography, More Photography and now the Philadelphia Eagles.

Posted 06 January 2007 - 06:25 AM

Gary...now I now who the film guy is..I shoot both an will continue until tere is no more film left on the shelfs or in Karenīs refrig.... :) I echo James thoughts..I have seen some real nasty, down right inrenet fights ove this subject. The film vs digital debate always seems to bring out the calvary. This comments on this forum lead me to believe that debates can be done intelligently with out leading to internet bloodshed. Thanks for all the professional replys. Now time to bring out the artilery as I try to et Dave W to: a. Buy a DA 50 b. Buy a F4, F5, F6 c. Buy all the above....... :) :) :) I am a stinker, arenīt EYE11111 :D

PhotoJazz - Just Capturing Life
PlanetNikon Member 141

 

Member of the following organizations:

American Society of Media Professionals

Fairmount Photo Club

NYI PhotoWorld Magazine

Photographic Society of Philadelphia

Philadelphia Photo League (PPL)

 

I photo-shoot with film, digital and medium format cameras, which includes the following:
Nikon D605, D200, F4E, F5, FE2 (Black & Silver), EM
Mamiya C330 Professional, M645 1000s, RB67
Bronica ETRSI

And I have some lenses.

C&C Is Always Welcome!!
New website coming soon!


#33 Gary Poole

Gary Poole

    Planet Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 672 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SE Michigan, USA

Posted 06 January 2007 - 10:15 AM

Gary...now I now who the film guy is..I shoot both an will continue until tere is no more film left on the shelfs or in Karenīs refrig.... :)
...

I have about 80 rolls of 36 exp. slide film (mostly Velvia 50 & 100) in my freezer and enough Fuji processing mailers to cover it all. That means that slide shooting only costs me $0.52 postage for the mailers. Those films should last me over a year.

I also have about 60 24 exp. rolls of some not so good Fuji print film and several rolls of NPS 160 36 exp.

BTW my wife's name is Karen, so like you I guess I can also say that I will "continue until tere [sic] is no more film left on the shelfs or in Karenīs refrig."
Gary in SE Michigan, USA
D4, D810, D300 (720nm IR), D90, F6, FM3a (black), FM2n (chrome)
YashicaMat 124, Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5

#34 EternaL

EternaL

    Planet Basic Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts
  • Location:Tennessee
  • Interests:Stock photography, hanging with digital Darrell, we live about 20 mins from each other.

Posted 06 January 2007 - 04:50 PM

Well, I, of course, voted for digital only. I used to have a film camera, and well, I took good pictures but knew absolutely nothing about shutter speed or that a histogram even existed, along with depth of field, and all the other settings. A digital camera allows you to actually see your results as soon as you take the picture. I learn from my mistakes immediately, where if I had to learn from shooting with film, by the time the film is developed it would take me a year to learn from all my mistakes. I hate to make some of the "old timers"mad, but film is dead. For my generation it is much faster and better, in my opinion, to learn from using a digital camera; a speed course in how to use a camera. Of course, as always, photography is an art, and the user has to be able to compose well, but learning from digital cameras for my generation is, and no doubt will be, a must. I vote Digital. Sincerely: Eternal

#35 Karen

Karen

    Planet Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1909 posts
  • Location:Atlanta, GA
  • Interests:Nature, wildlife and macro photography, reading, hiking, backpacking, camping, dog and bird training

Posted 06 January 2007 - 07:24 PM

I didn't comment before bec I voted digital and film and figured it was as straight an answer as I could give. I voted like this bec I still have a roll of unprocessed film on my dresser from a month ago (shame on me, I need to turn it in) and I love my older 35mm SLR even if it is not a Nikon. It taught me the relationship between shutter, aperture and film speed by reading everything from the manual to books, rereading and practicing. I learned how to use a flash unit with it as, well. I developed film and kept all the prints when others refuse to pay for their bad ones, just so I could study them and compare the bad with the good. I wrote down how I set exposure settings and compared these, too. I know I will not use it like I do my DSLR, but I cannot put it away, either. I agree with what Tony says in that digital is an excellent teacher and I've learned even more using it, without the added expenses, of course. Some things just die hard...smile. Yep, I still have roll in the frige, so I'd better make it a point to use it! And might I say Gary, your wife has a lovely name...LOL. So now my challenge is learning digital even further. And I know this is the place to learn that!
{any and all comments are welcome}

~Karen

#36 Karen

Karen

    Planet Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1909 posts
  • Location:Atlanta, GA
  • Interests:Nature, wildlife and macro photography, reading, hiking, backpacking, camping, dog and bird training

Posted 06 January 2007 - 08:22 PM

Tony, it is so quaint! I love it and the fact that nothing has changed. Very comfortable colors. See, there is still a need for film, once in a while, lest we forget....smile.
{any and all comments are welcome}

~Karen

#37 photojazz

photojazz

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19274 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philly
  • Interests:Photography, Photography, , More Photography, More Photography and now the Philadelphia Eagles.

Posted 07 January 2007 - 03:58 AM

Hey Karen, here is a 6 x 7 from the RB 67 of the downtown in my little village. This is the town that Jack London called home. Glen Ellen.


This was taken with Agfa Optima 400 film about 3 years ago. :D Nothings changed!


I knew it when I saw it...Can't beat a great RB67 shot...Film shooters unite..Film shooters forever..Viva TMAX.... :)

Fujichrome for president!

PhotoJazz - Just Capturing Life
PlanetNikon Member 141

 

Member of the following organizations:

American Society of Media Professionals

Fairmount Photo Club

NYI PhotoWorld Magazine

Photographic Society of Philadelphia

Philadelphia Photo League (PPL)

 

I photo-shoot with film, digital and medium format cameras, which includes the following:
Nikon D605, D200, F4E, F5, FE2 (Black & Silver), EM
Mamiya C330 Professional, M645 1000s, RB67
Bronica ETRSI

And I have some lenses.

C&C Is Always Welcome!!
New website coming soon!


#38 Dave Whiteley

Dave Whiteley

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6183 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nottingham, United Kingdom
  • Interests:Plant, close-up and macrophotography.

Posted 07 January 2007 - 04:23 PM

James,

"I still think a well exposed projected or back lighted slide has a look digital can not replicate yet."

But where do you get well projected slides! I belonged in the past to a couple of photo clubs and I never saw what I considered good projection of slides. To me for fair judging in competitions there ought to be a set brightness for the projection screen measured in lumens with a hand held light meter and no slide in the projector gate in order to assess corect exposure. This idea of underexposing slides slightly to enhance the colours is OK for printing from slides where increased exposure is given, but makes for dimmer slides on screen. I really don't know how photo judges can fairly assess a slide for correct exposure unless there is a standard screen brightness from club to club. Also the premises need to be properly blacked out so you get no light on the screen from windows or through curtains.

Obviously the judges were very keen on correct exposure when judging prints, but far too casual to me when judging slides.

I always thought slides made better colour prints than colour negatives when printed on positive papers like the old Cibachrome.

Dave Whiteley
Nikon D200
AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70 mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
60mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor
70mm-180mm AF ED f4.5-f5.6 D Micro-Nikkor
Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF)
Nikon PB6 belows, Nikon Tubes.
2X Nikon SB600 flash guns
Manfrotto dual flash bracket

#39 Rebel

Rebel

    Planet Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 899 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 07 January 2007 - 07:06 PM

I can't afford to shoot film any more. It was always a slow and expensive business even though I did most of my own developing and printing. I've still got my film cameras because they are too beat up from use to sell and maybe one day I'll put a roll of film through one of them for auld lang syne. For now though digital is all I use. It hasn't improved my photography, I don't think, but it has revolutionised the way I approach it. It has also put me in full control of the finished result. There's an upside and a downside to being able to shoot as many pictures as I want without having to worry about cost or running out of film. Upside: I can just shoot whatever, whenever and delete the rubbish. If people want me to shoot their picture (which they do all the time) I can just go ahead and do it. I'll delete it later if I don't want the shot. Downside: I'm often less careful about my shots and have to check myself to remember to keep my composition, exposure, depth of field and all those disciplines in my work lest I end up with a hard drive full of second rate or useless shots. These photographic disciplines are what makes my work look professional and a cut above an amateur's work.
Who we are, shapes what we see ~ Chris Orwig

Ask yourself what makes you come alive and go and do that. For what the world needs, is people who have come fully alive ~ Gil Bailie

#40 photojazz

photojazz

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19274 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philly
  • Interests:Photography, Photography, , More Photography, More Photography and now the Philadelphia Eagles.

Posted 08 January 2007 - 02:52 AM

A I said before this is the best discussion I have come across on the WWW for this topic. From to domsday, this will always be a hotly contested debate. Shoot film shoot digital...Shoot Both! I can' get no satisfaction so I shoot film, I shoot digital..Can't get no!...Rolling Stones!! :rolleyes:

PhotoJazz - Just Capturing Life
PlanetNikon Member 141

 

Member of the following organizations:

American Society of Media Professionals

Fairmount Photo Club

NYI PhotoWorld Magazine

Photographic Society of Philadelphia

Philadelphia Photo League (PPL)

 

I photo-shoot with film, digital and medium format cameras, which includes the following:
Nikon D605, D200, F4E, F5, FE2 (Black & Silver), EM
Mamiya C330 Professional, M645 1000s, RB67
Bronica ETRSI

And I have some lenses.

C&C Is Always Welcome!!
New website coming soon!


#41 EternaL

EternaL

    Planet Basic Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts
  • Location:Tennessee
  • Interests:Stock photography, hanging with digital Darrell, we live about 20 mins from each other.

Posted 08 January 2007 - 07:02 PM

Hearing both sides, I understand where some of you are coming from. However I do make money from digital images. I am a Stock Photographer. Being completely realistic, I would not be a stock photographer, if I shot with film. It would be such a complicated process, to be a stock photographer using film. And when I say some are, "old times" I hope I don't come across as a teenager to some. I am almost 30. All I am saying is, that, People my age and younger, are not going to learn with film, and will not want to. Unless, they have some affinity for antiques. Again not tiring to be sarcastic, just realistic. Let me put it this way. There are TV's out there, that you can plug everything into, and I mean everything, internet, dvd's,game consoles,computers,and the TV's are high Def. Now you can still get a picture on a black and white TV, but what can you do with it, how many contraptions can you plug in it, to get the most use out of it? None. With Digital cameras you get more for your money, with all the features. The time is now, when people, ( and maybe only people my age), see that digital is better for the user in many different ways. When was the last time you where able to shoot in RAW using film. You have so much more control. I shoot in nothing but RAW. When was the last time you where able to see the histogram on a film camera, or for that matter the highlights showing burnouts. One member stated that she was often less careful about her shots and had to check herself to remember to keep her composition, exposure, depth of field. If you actually learned on a digital camera, would that still happen? Maybe, maybe not. Film may not be completely dead, but the user will ultimately decide which is better, and which has the most uses to do what he or she wants.

Edited by EternaL, 08 January 2007 - 07:04 PM.


#42 justshootit

justshootit

    Deep Space Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4066 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cleveland, O
  • Interests:Event photography, candids, travelogues, aircraft photography.

Posted 12 January 2007 - 03:37 AM

Y'know, EVERY time I think I'm getting more comfortable with digital, some !@*$&#^ thing happens... Was out shooting at the San Clemente pier last Sunday, and was using the D70 -- the AF (my main beef with that camera) was seemingly working well tracking the surfers and I was beginning to think I was making a bigger deal than I should about the film-to-digi transition. When I got home, the first shot on the card was corrupt :angry: . Yeah, I know, you can get bad film too, but overall I think it's a lot tougher to corrupt film than digital (unless you absentmindedly open the back a little too often). This isn't to say that I'm going to dump digital; I'm probably going to buy a D200 soon. But I'm not transitioning the tough jobs until I get a LOT more comfortable with digital technology. Even then, the old N90s and/or F100 is coming along as a backup -- even if it's a backup to the backup. For now, when I absolutely, positively have to get the shot, it's going to be with a film body. Just FYI, PictureProject, of all things, saved the day (sorta). It was able to display the shot even though the NEF file was screwed up, and I was able to expand it to just about full screen, do a <CTRL><ALT><PrintScreen> and save the resulting clipboard image as a TIFF. Not nearly at the resolution the camera's capable of, but at least I got something. I tried running ImageRescue, and both NC and PSE2 were unable to open the rescued file. IOW, the file was corrupted on the card, not in the transfer to the computer. I've since switched cards and will test the suspect one. Also, the AF worked reasonably well considering that the D70 really isn't a sports camera. A shot is attached -- it's been cropped from the original to show the detail. Attached File  DSC_0022.jpg   86.16KB   27 downloads D70, 300/2.8 AFS, 1.4x TC14E, Bogen 3051 with Bogen 3063 video head 1/640th @ f/5.6, ISO 500 AF-C Dynamic, Central Sensor sRGB

Edited by justshootit, 12 January 2007 - 03:47 AM.

Don
==========================================================
Digital: D610 backed up by a D1x.  Quoted from an unknown source by a fellow planeteer, "Never get rid of a working D1x." I've got to agree.

Film: N90s, F3, F100, F4s, C330s. A few lenses.

Why film photography? I like shooting with the equipment. 6x6 Velvia slides from a C330 have an appeal all their own.

Why automated 35mm/Digital cameras? Event photography is about capturing moments. It often requires quick response. Well done automaton can be your friend or your enemy. It all depends on knowing what it can and can't do. "A man's got to know his (camera's) limitations." paraphrasing Dirty Harry...

#43 mhe162

mhe162

    Planet Basic Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 16 July 2007 - 06:42 PM

Just changed over from 35mm. My intensions were to shoot both. Now i have my new d200 i am 100% convinced i am now 100% digital user. Mark

Edited by mhe162, 16 July 2007 - 06:43 PM.

Nikon D3
Nikon D700
Nikon 17-35mm AF-S
Nikon 24-70mm F2.8
Nikon 70-300mm AF-S VR
Nikon 200-400mm F4 VR

#44 DigitalDarrell

DigitalDarrell

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 July 2007 - 11:02 PM

I own nearly every Digital SLR Nikon has made, and most of the film cameras too, except the very earliest ones from the 1950s. In my opinion, digital cameras are like film cameras, you get what you pay for.

The Nikon N80 or F80 (film, not D80) is a prime example of what I mean. It was a fine little camera, capable of taking excellent images. The build was not up to an F100, and nowhere close to an F5, but it did its job. The AF was much slower in lower light levels, and the camera was simply not as fast. You could get the job done, and Galen Rowell is one who loved the little N80, and we all know about his work. But, you did not often see a hardcore sports shooter, or photojournalist hanging mongo lenses off of a N80. It was made of plastic, after all.

Now, in the digital world, we have choices of amateur cameras like the D40/x, D70/s, and the D80. They are fine cameras, and will get the shot, like the N80 used to. But they are not made for pros who beat the snot out of their cameras crawling thorough mud, being mowed down by football players, or run over by race cars. Those guys buy lots of medical insurance and use D2Xs'.

The D200 is like the F100, and the D2Xs is like the F5. Lesser digital cameras will still get the shot, but you'll have to work harder to get it, and be seriously more prone to failure in all aspects, since the camera is not made for speed and stress shooting.

A professional shooter should not judge the digital world by an amateur digital camera. The transition to digital is very expensive, though, and many do not want to spend all that money, just in case they don't like digital. Unfortunately, digital is here to stay, and film is not as mainstream, and declining.

Since this is the case, professionals should seriously consider NOT wasting money by buying amateur cameras. Sometimes, the pattern is that a pro will buy something like a D70 or D80 to test it out in a work environment, and then experience problems of various sorts. It usually frustrates the pro, who is used to the heavy build and high-speed of their pro film cameras. They fail to get the shot with the cheaper digitals, and feel frustrated toward digital in the process. Digital is not the problem! Cheaper amateur cameras are the problem. Some pros bite the bullet and buy pro digital to begin with, and are amazed at how smoothly the transition to digital goes. In fact, they often enjoy the transition, since they are not worrying about their cameras exploding, and keep on getting the shot, over and over. They can spend the time necessary to learn the computer side of dealing with digital images, instead. (like learning darkroom of old)

A professional digital camera performs like a professional camera should. If one's job is to bring in the images (bacon) every time, why fiddle around with lesser equipment to see if it will do the job. They won't consistently! If they would, they would cost 10 times more. Judge digital ONLY with a pro camera, if you are a pro. You will never be happy with anything less. You are spoiled by cameras that perform hardcore. You expect hardcore. You get hardcore from the D2Xs, and slightly lesser so from the D200 (like the F100).

Does your income depend on getting the image? Then buy a hardcore camera to get it, and you will. The speed, quality, flexibility, and power is available, but you have to pay for it. Why expect anything less to work than equipment made for the job? If one is shooting pretty little butterflies in a backyard garden, then any camera will do. However, if one is dodging charging rhinos and gators, they better have a camera they can defend themselves with!

Read this about how a D2X saved my life... (Whew!)
http://www.planetnik...WhoopsABear.asp
Best regards,
Darrell Young (Digital Darrell)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Better too many words than not enough understanding." - Darrell Young
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bodies
: Nikon D810, D800, D750, D600, D2X, COOLPIX A, D100, F80, FM, EM, Olympus OM-D E-M1, Olympus OM-D E-M10
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lenses
: AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED, AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G, AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Special Edition (for Df), AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G VR (x2), AF-S Nikkor DX 16-85mm f/3.5-4.5G VR, AF Nikkor 80-400 f/4.5-5.6D ED VR, AF Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8, AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR, AF-S Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR, AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8D, AI Nikkor 35mm f/2, AI Nikkor 50mm 5/1.8, AI Nikkor 50mm 5/1.8 Series E, AI Nikkor 105mm f/2.5, AI Nikkor 200mm f/4, Non-AI Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 10-20mm EX f/3.5-5.6, M.Zuiko 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, M.Zuiko PRO 12-40mm f/2.8 ED
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accessories:
Nikon SB-910 Speedlight, Nikon SB-900 Speedlight, Nikon GP-1 GPS, Nikon ME-1 Microphone, Eye-Fi Wireless Cards, Atomos Ninja Blade External HDMI Video Recorder, Atomos Ninja-2 External HDMI Video Recorder, Atomos Samurai Blade External Video Recorder, Manfrotto Tripods, Markins M-10 Ballhead, Lots of camera bags, Metz 24 AF-1 Flash, Olympus FL-600R Flash, Olympus HLD-7 Battery Grip
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of:

Nikon Professional Services (NPS), Professional Photographers of America (PPA), North American Nature Photography Association (NANPA), Founding Member of Nikonians Writers' Guild (www.Nikonians.org), Charter Member (year 2000) of Nikonians.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#45 james23p

james23p

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22439 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis TN
  • Interests:I am an avid film user and digital user. I enjoy both formats and firmly believe they can live side by side.

    Right Jazz! :D

Posted 16 July 2007 - 11:16 PM

I love my D80. :)

God bless all those in harms way and Go Navy!




D700 w/MB-D10, D605 w/MB-D14, D200 w/MB-D200, D50, Coolpix P330.

Nikon 1 stuff: Nikon V1, Nikkor 10mm f2.8 pancake w/HN-N101 & HC-N101, Nikkor 10-30mm f3.5-5.6 w/HB-N101 Aspherical VR,, Nikkor 18.5mm f1.8 w/HB-N104, Nikon 1 FT-1, SB-N5 w/Polaroid Diffuser .

F100 w MB-15, N80, FM3a, FE2(Black and Silver) and EM.

Nikkor 24-85G ED AF-S VR, 70-300G ED AF-S VR, 28-105 3.5-4.5 AF-D, 50 1.8 AF-D, Nikkor 18-35 f3.5-4.5 AF-D ED.

Nikon Series E lens, 28mm, 100mm, 135mm, 75-150mm, 70-210 f4.

MF Nikkor's 50 f2 Ai, 500 f4 ED Ai-P.

 

MF Rokinon 14mm f2.8 ED AE UMC(Ai-P)

MF Rokinon 85mm f1.4 ASP AE UMC(Ai-P)

Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG HSM, Tamron's SP 70-200 f2.8 LD Di IF/Macro BIM, Kenko Pro 300 1.4 TC DGX, Tokina 100 f2.8D Macro At-X.

Pro Manfrotto 055XV with Markins M10 ,Sirui P-326 6-Section Carbon Fiber Monopod with Markins Q3 Emille, Manfrotto Compact MKC3-H01M with Combo Head, 3Pod PTT1H Table Top Tripod with Giottos MH1304 Ballhead.


#46 Dennis

Dennis

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14249 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Colorado
  • Interests:Photography, music, hiking (part of photography).

Posted 17 July 2007 - 12:27 AM

I just ordered my D200. After a long and somewhat disappinting research I decided to get the D200. It feels like my F100, which I shoot all the time. I started with the FM, then got the FM2 and for a long time that is all I used (20 some years). I then got the F100 and have not even used the FM's.

I am not sure why I am getting into digital, I personally don't have a reason. I can get most of my shots the first time, and enjoy working on the ones that I missed (but still got becuase I was able to bracket). The D200, to me feels like the F100, so that was a plus.

I guess if I had to figure out a reason, it is becuase I think I will have more control over the outcome. I shoot film when I had to (wedding, portaits, skating events and the like). But I mostly shot reversal film, becuase that was for me. Reversal, you have to work more for the pic, but the feeling of working it, getting it right after it comes back from the lab, thats the feeling I hope I don't lose with digital.

I think my dislike for digital stems from some of the images that are put forth as a photograph. Some one takes a composit, and becuase they are good with PS, they make it look like a real image, and pass it off as such. Now, I don't want to get into the discussion of digital is art to, just admit what one did.

Andsel Adems manipulated each shot, in the camera, in the development and in the printing. He adminted it, and he produced great images. However, those manipulations were to bring out all the best from the same one image. I have not read where Admes took the sky from one image, took a monutain sean from another image and put them together and said, this is what I saw. Adems manipulated the one negative to produce the one image to bring out all the best from the one image. Collages is not one image, and to pass it as if it were, and you say I just teawk it a little bit, that is not real photography to me.

I like to produce portaits like Oscar Lozoya http://www.lozoya.co...ter_studies.htm. The contrast I could not get with color becuase I did not have my own lab. I was never good enough to get my BW to that point that I have been striving for. I would come close, but not there. Now with digital, I think I can attempt it, for both color and BW.

Will I give up reversal film, only when I can no longer find a lad to develop it and a lab to make the pruints from it. Right now, I am giving digital a whir and I am hopping to open up new avenues in my photography and get to that platou. After 30 years, I think I can still learn new tricks, and if I get to my platou, I will find another level to shoot for.

Thanks, Dennis.

Photography: 100 percent art, 100 percent technical. It takes a photographer to blend them into an image.

​Film: That tangible image that you can see and hold.

My Web Site.
My 500px page.

My Instagram.
Member; Colorado Springs Creative Photography Group

Nikon D4, D200, Fm2, FM, Mamiya RB67.
 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users