Ascender
Established
I Beg To Differ
I Beg To Differ
I guarantee you, no... I would be prepared to bet money on it that if you called in a hundred laymen off of the street and put both of those images next to each other and asked them which one they preferred, an overwhelming amount, if not all of them would pick the digital image. Hey, I'm as much in love with film than the next guy, I have numerous film cameras including going out of my way (and pocket) to finally get hold of a 50 year anniversary three lens set Titanium M7 but to my eye the first film image you displayed looks flat, irritatingly grainy or noisy (what ever one wants to call it), lacking in contrast and just plain overall lifeless whereas the digital image is the opposite.
Yes, you are right, digital will never replace film... it's not meant to, it's a different medium altogether, it's BETTER! Shoot with a Contax 645 together with a Phase P30+ back then tell me digital hasn't got what film had. This whole digital versus film thing is romantic nonsense and what is even more surprising is that people have such short memories as to just how limiting film really was and just how noisy or grainy and subsequently...unmanageable especially colour film was when that grain got out of control.
We need to get over it, personally I don't see the point in trying to make film look like digital, it's, it's own thing and what really needs to change and in my opinion, is changing at a rapid rate is people's understanding of how to process digital.
Here's a link to some work of a great photgrapher friend of mine who can write the book on the technicalitites of film and photgraphy. A long time film shooter who now won't go near it. This is an example of what can happen when one releases one's self from the burdon of 'trying to recreate a dead medium', instead concentrating on trying to create something fresh, new and unique.
It's all about the post!
http://russellrutherford.com/sports/
-charlie
I Beg To Differ
I went out yesterday with my M4-P - Nokton 40/1.4 SC two rolls of Trix and took this picture during a religious parade in downtown Toronto. (Processed in Rodinal 1+50). Just an ordinary shot, a little soft and cropped to square format...
But then again the same scene with a DSLR (RAW converted to b&w) and exposure is the same for both shots.
To me as a digital shooter it was instantly obvious that what is an ordinary shot in digital is suddenly 'something else' altogether with film.
And off course the digital image was processed to b&w and was tweaked to look as close to the film version as possible, where in fact this is how the digital really looked (with processing and little sharpening).
I will continue shooting digital because I cannot afford film but it is my humble opinion that digital can never truly replace film as the medium which turns the ordinary into something extraordinary.
The first picture was there in the negative when the light was exposed on it and the second one had to be transformed, tweaked and still lacked the feel and mood of the first one... To me that pretty much sums up the film vs. digital argument.
I guarantee you, no... I would be prepared to bet money on it that if you called in a hundred laymen off of the street and put both of those images next to each other and asked them which one they preferred, an overwhelming amount, if not all of them would pick the digital image. Hey, I'm as much in love with film than the next guy, I have numerous film cameras including going out of my way (and pocket) to finally get hold of a 50 year anniversary three lens set Titanium M7 but to my eye the first film image you displayed looks flat, irritatingly grainy or noisy (what ever one wants to call it), lacking in contrast and just plain overall lifeless whereas the digital image is the opposite.
Yes, you are right, digital will never replace film... it's not meant to, it's a different medium altogether, it's BETTER! Shoot with a Contax 645 together with a Phase P30+ back then tell me digital hasn't got what film had. This whole digital versus film thing is romantic nonsense and what is even more surprising is that people have such short memories as to just how limiting film really was and just how noisy or grainy and subsequently...unmanageable especially colour film was when that grain got out of control.
We need to get over it, personally I don't see the point in trying to make film look like digital, it's, it's own thing and what really needs to change and in my opinion, is changing at a rapid rate is people's understanding of how to process digital.
Here's a link to some work of a great photgrapher friend of mine who can write the book on the technicalitites of film and photgraphy. A long time film shooter who now won't go near it. This is an example of what can happen when one releases one's self from the burdon of 'trying to recreate a dead medium', instead concentrating on trying to create something fresh, new and unique.
It's all about the post!
http://russellrutherford.com/sports/
-charlie
