So what's the deal with film?

DanOnRoute66 said:
And here's another point: Film has higher resolution than digital. It may not be true in the future but it's true now.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how much scope there is to get more resolution out of digital. I suspect there would have to be a major change in how the sensors work to be able to make the pixels smaller while retaining adquate light gathering capability and keeping noise acceptably low.
 
With 18MPixel and 24MPixel 35mm full-frame equivalent cameras, pretty much Digital has caught up with film for all practical purposes. I can see much finer details when adjusting lenses with the M8 than I could with the film cameras.

Large format cameras- film has the edge. With 35mm cameras, the Digital has caught up.
 
DanOnRoute66 said:
In order to "move on," as you say, wouldn't I have to spend a ton of money to buy new digital equipment? Why, when I have film cameras that work just fine?

And here's another point: Film has higher resolution than digital. It may not be true in the future but it's true now.
Click to expand...

Hm. You need a Nikon 9000 to come close to a resolution of a 5DII. That scanner was not cheap at all and is not produced anymore. If you want to exceed the resolution of the 5DII you need something like a flextight scanner. Look at the prices!
 
I am the biggest FORTRAN fan. And Assembly language. With MIPS assembly, I could turn off the automatic instruction re-ordering performed by the assembler, manually order the instructions to interleave operations with regard to memory-fetch delays, and get a net increase in speed. I miss the heavy-metal vector computers, but really like RISC assembly. and applications where all that matters is execution speed: run fast or crash.
 
The best thing about Film in a Classic Mechanical Camera- rule number 3.

Most people are using Digital Cameras with software in it that they did not even write themselves.

You end up with this:

"Please turn M8 'Protect' button into 'ISO' button. POLL. "

http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1587350#post1587350

If everyone wrote their own software for their Digital Camera, we would not have these problems! Just go in and modify the code to make the hardware do what you want!

If you think Film vs Digital debates are bad, you should sit in on some Programming Style forums. I tend to be an aggressive programmer. Like disassemble the compiler to find out what it did wrong.
 
Film is what i know and what i'm confortable with...

I was a pro doing corporate, travel, stock and editorial magazine minding me own biz when i suddenly burnt out on new year's eve 2000.

Prospect were bad...computers were to explode and i was scratching my head trying to figure out Photoshop and Illustrator.

So i retired and became a gentleman farmer, raising Longhorns in the Townships...

All of a sudden...i got the bug again about a month ago...ordered 3 Foitlander RM and 15, 21,40 from the man along with Velvia and Tri-X and i'm back with a vengeance...🙂🙂🙂
 
ndnik said:
It is not about technology and therefore your analogy of color tv or modern cars does not apply. Photography is a visual art. Film has a specific look to it. It looks like, well, film. Some of us simply like this look. I find it much easier to shoot film than to mess around in post processing trying to imperfectly recreate that look from digital files.

- N.
Click to expand...

Thank You..
 
I prefer the look of film-based images over digital images. I enjoy the process of shooting film, developing it, and printing it. I like the permanence and archival characteristics of film. I find darkroom work rewarding. I like to look at chromes on a light box. I like older, simpler, mechanical cameras with only the essential controls. My 8x10 Deardorff is my favorite camera, albeit not the one I use the most.

I don't have anything against digital, but I don't get excited about photography when I'm using a digital camera. I find digital photography to be convenient for ebay and craigslist and forum snaps. I'm really glad I don't have to process a roll of film and scan it every time I want to post a picture on the web. On the other hand, I don't want to spend a lot of time with an image manipulation program to clean up or enhance or modify a digital image. A quick crop and resize is all I want to bother with. I'm on the computer all day long as it is. The last thing I want to do is spend yet more time in front of the monitor in the pursuit of my hobbies.
 
"If you think Film vs Digital debates are bad, you should sit in on some Programming Style forums"

😀 Oh yeah, this Film vs Digital thing is NOTHING compared to the way us coders beat each other up. We get physical 🙂
 
stolen years

stolen years

I didn't know what was missing, these fleeting affairs with digital cameras...but after being shown and tried the whole cycle from taking the picture, developing the negatives, and printing in the darkroom, there is indeed something about film that makes the heart beat faster.

Let's see, first, like any great relationship, there's got to be "chemistry" involved with film 🙂

2nd, there's the "one and only" element: with film you know you have the original, genuine article that was THERE at the scene at that very same spot, same moment, breathing the same air as you..it's the Terroire element that cannot be reproduced.

3rd, wet-printing is like watching your child grow and develop. You get to focus the grain, set the frame, play with the light, and most of all, be reunited with that film that was with you when you took that picture, whether it's yesterday, or 20 years ago....it was and still IS.

That's about sums it up for me. Sure, I like the look of film, but looks aren't everything, or much of anything compared to the awesomeness and the integrity that lives on that piece of film.

(sorry, am i gushing?)
 
It isn't about the cost. I can afford any digital camera. It isn't about heritage. It isn't about being a luddite. It isn't about denying myself instant feedback, or being limited to 36 frames. For color digital is the way to go for me. How B&W however its film all the way:

- Ease of shooting. B&W film is far more flexible than digital. Its very easy to ruin a digital image. Given enough exposure its very hard to ruin a B&W negative.
- The wet print. For B&W a wet print simply looks better than a digital print. Yes, I've tried custom B&W ink sets. No, they are not as good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom