Do you hate digital?

TaoPhoto said:
Film is not a religion? True, though both film and digital afficiandos often sound like evangelists. I have to admit that the folks here on RFF frequently remind me of a group from one of the contemplative traditions, perhaps monasticism or Buddhism. Digital evangelists remind me more of the preachers I see on TV.

That aside. I do find digital useful, if not inspirational. If someone here says "post a picture of your xxx camera!" it's probably going to be a digital shot. For one-off needs, quick uploads and similar requirements, I wouldn't want to be without digital cameras.

However, for creating a new body of work on the fine art side, making portraits, or simply enjoying the color and light of the world, film is it for me. Perhaps someone else feels the same way about digital.
Click to expand...

this is exactly what i meant..
 
Personally,
digital for my work, but film for anything else.

Digital is reliable. I can shoot, review, thether, back up, and work on an image/clip instantly. It may feel a bit soulless, but nevertheless, reliable and convenient. That's good for both my client & i.

I dont like to overly romanticize film, but making a photograph by burning sheet of film with light has a satisfying feel to it.

No need to hate digital. It serves a purpose in photography.
As for film, it revives the passion and soul to it.
 
Hate for a technology is silly.

Digital just has nothing to excite me, even if I use it regularly and I bless its usefulness. I love having an easy access to pictures, the ability to take snaps when I sell gear, to have scans from my films to share with other people, and to disseminate at large.

But there's nothing in the materiality of digital that I find exciting. Inkjet prints, even though they have better gamut than RA-4, do not have the soul I want. Ditto in black and white. A digital workflow may be more precise, afford more control over the details of contrast, yet it does not sing or make me hot. That's why I print RA-4 and B&W.

Last night I contact printed 8x10 negatives on silver chloride paper, then I toned the pictures in selenium. One could take a look at them and say that an inkjet would have had better contrast, better sharpness, yadda yadda, and perhaps be right.

But I don't want perfection: I want uniqueness.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
I've worked with Digital imaging for most of my life, started in 1981.

I prefer having source code for my digital cameras, make them work "my way". Getting used to not having it, "annoying" at worst.

But- the Leica M9, comes really close to my ideal digital camera. I'd like one with a Monochrome sensor without the IR abosrbing glass. I'll take care of the firmware if Leica needs help.
Click to expand...

Funny you should say that, because I think the last time a computer held me in thrall was my old 8086 PC clone running DOS 5. It had 640k of memory, two 360k floppy drives, a mouse, EGA display, and I managed to find a 2400 baud modem for it.

I knew it inside out: memory management, interrupts number (remember INT 21 ?), how to arrange DIP switches to change channel on extension cards, how to access the display über-fast directly in machine code (I used Borland Turbo Assembler), making TSR programs, listening to the serial port, and I could go on.

That computer managed to get me on the Internet in 1993, and it allowed me to get kicked out of CompuServe chatrooms because I was a teenage idiot, but man did I learn from it and loved its wonders.

I could push it to the extreme limits, because it was so limited, and my brain could apprehend it as a whole to imagine what it could do.

I can't do that for modern computers, and I have no idea how I could do it with a digital camera (even if some people like you do). I think that's why digital has no wonders for me: I don't know how to hack it the way I can "hack" film photos.
 
This is a bit of a silly comparison, but it makes the point.
I don't really like eating McDonalds or enjoy the taste. But there are times when it's convenient. Most times I enjoy home-cooked, hand prepared or a decent cafe or restaurant. Either way my need for 'fuel' is satisfied but the enjoyment factor is a different matter.
 
mhv said:
Funny you should say that, because I think the last time a computer held me in thrall was my old 8086 PC clone running DOS 5. It had 640k of memory, two 360k floppy drives, a mouse, EGA display, and I managed to find a 2400 baud modem for it.

I knew it inside out: memory management, interrupts number (remember INT 21 ?), how to arrange DIP switches to change channel on extension cards, how to access the display über-fast directly in machine code (I used Borland Turbo Assembler), making TSR programs, listening to the serial port, and I could go on.

That computer managed to get me on the Internet in 1993, and it allowed me to get kicked out of CompuServe chatrooms because I was a teenage idiot, but man did I learn from it and loved its wonders.

I could push it to the extreme limits, because it was so limited, and my brain could apprehend it as a whole to imagine what it could do.

I can't do that for modern computers, and I have no idea how I could do it with a digital camera (even if some people like you do). I think that's why digital has no wonders for me: I don't know how to hack it the way I can "hack" film photos.
Click to expand...

+1 ..........
 
mhv said:
Funny you should say that, because I think the last time a computer held me in thrall was my old 8086 PC clone running DOS 5. It had 640k of memory, two 360k floppy drives, a mouse, EGA display, and I managed to find a 2400 baud modem for it.

I knew it inside out: memory management, interrupts number (remember INT 21 ?), how to arrange DIP switches to change channel on extension cards, how to access the display über-fast directly in machine code (I used Borland Turbo Assembler), making TSR programs, listening to the serial port, and I could go on.

That computer managed to get me on the Internet in 1993, and it allowed me to get kicked out of CompuServe chatrooms because I was a teenage idiot, but man did I learn from it and loved its wonders.

I could push it to the extreme limits, because it was so limited, and my brain could apprehend it as a whole to imagine what it could do.

I can't do that for modern computers, and I have no idea how I could do it with a digital camera (even if some people like you do). I think that's why digital has no wonders for me: I don't know how to hack it the way I can "hack" film photos.
Click to expand...

That is the nice thing about working with embedded code. It really hasn't changed much from your DOS computer. I still write in assembly language, do my own interrupt handlers, and write my own device drivers. I've used O-Scopes and Logic analyzers to debug code. What's even better, having the hardware made to your own spec. It's like being a kid again, writing Z80 code. Z80 interrupt mode 2. That was a chip.

I guess I can't have mis-spent my youth, just my middle-aged years. Now approaching "Senior Discount" years, I'm loving work. So no, not sick of digital.
 
Last edited:
I neither hate nor love digital. Nor do I hate nor love film. I mostly shoot digital due to the convenience, control and quality of the image. I like the immediate feedback from the screen, and from the computer as I make adjustments.

But I honest to god love film cameras. As much as I love my M9 it doesn't have the same feeling as my M7. Slimmer body or different balance or whatever, but it just feels nicer to me. Then there's the Contax T3. Goodness, that's a hot little camera, with smooth rounded edges and glistening lens. I really enjoy many of my digital cameras, but I loooove my film cameras.
 
On the nose ...

On the nose ...

TaoPhoto said:
I neither love nor hate digital. It's a tool, it has its uses, and its limitations. I do, however, love film. The tactile sense of it, the way it captures light and color, the way it makes me slow down and make each shot count. I love film cameras, for their lightness and relatively uncomplicated construction, for the way they feel in my hand. When I come a job or some event inspiring photography, film camera in hand, I feel like an artist. When I arrive with a DSLR in hand, I feel like everyone else.
Click to expand...

I think Norm said it perfect here. To add my 6x7 cents ... Shoot digital when the job "requires" it and then shoot film to mend your soul.
 
Digital can f**k with your head, man (so can internal meters once you get used to not having them but that's another story); the other day I was taking pictures with my Nikon F100 and started taking some of my two-year-old boy and as he crawled under the table just cute as a puppy I started pumping up the ISO to like 1250 or 1600 except I was shooting Velvia 100 chrome.... problem is the F100 and my D300 are almost identical in the hand with many similar features so I just forgot what I was doing.

Actually maybe modern cameras are the problem, not digital. This would not have happened with a Leica IIIf in my hands.
 
Do I hate digital? No.

Do I love film? Yes.

Do I hate Photoshopping and all other forms of post-processing and computer work in general (RFF excepted of course)? Hell, yes, I hate it! Three years after surgery and the pain ranges from 2-9 all day, everyday of my life!:mad: Read this for a little insight:

http://www.nationalhandspecialists.com/injuries/nerve/cts_elbow.html

Surgery helped a great deal but my arms hurt constantly even now.
 
I don't really hate anything but sometimes I'm forced by customers to deliver digitally manipulated film. I do like to eat.

Am I glad that digital cameras exist? YES, they decrease the demand of film which makes it more affordable. So I can shoot lots of it.

Am I annoyed by every joe schmo who thinks he's a photographer because he's got a fancy new digital camera and wants me to show him how to use it? YES.

Do I think that if Professionals stuck to film then the market and subsequent development of high end digital would cease, thus ensuring our livelihood. YES!

Do I enjoy watching a fine print come up in developer. YES!

Do I take other film Photographers seriously? YEs!
 
I miss my darkroom, but don't miss the smells, the fight against dust etc...
Digital darkroom solution... just as the 50's!
Digital >Sepia, edges, grain, vignetting, doding and burning.....what else do you want?


Mondo Verdi186 by pietjs©, on Flickr

Leica M8
Capture One Pro, SilverEfex Pro 2, Truegrain
 
I still think film works out cheaper if you want big prints and high quality; you can get this with digital but it will cost a small fortune even before you get into the inevitable consumer electronics upgrade cycle. Work out the cost of a Canon 1Ds or Leica M9 every five years - because you'll want the next one when it comes out - compared to keeping an M6 for the rest of your life.

What I find hard to swallow about digital is that it's almost killed any film R&D, and film has a lot left to give. There is some new Eastern European stuff but Kodak have more or less given up - they're selling Jurassic Plus-X as their main medium speed film! Film hasn't got noticeably more expensive though, and while processing has increased in cost, it's still cheap if you scan the negs or slides at home.

Digital is great for eBay pack shots and for flash sync testing, though!
 
Why would you want more film R&D? To bring it up to digital capabilities? :)

Honestly though, the issues you raise really aren't true any more. IMO, digital has reached a point where (1) I don't need to buy up every few years because the image quality at high ISO is splendid now, and (2) I'm saving roughly $1500 a year, now that I don't have film purchase and processing costs.

By the way, what do you consider "big prints"? I easily print 13 x 19 inch prints that look marvelous. If I had a bigger printer, I'm sure I could easily go bigger than 13 x19.
 
I enjoy both film and digital and they both have their uses. I mostly use just one camera these days (Ricoh GR Digital III), but it's nice to burn off a couple of rolls of film now and again.
 
Why should I hate digital? I can shoot, take the SD-card to the local camera shop, plunk it on the counter and can have the stuff that's on there printed without having to do a thing myself. There's absolutely no difference with a roll of film.

That said, I did feel a pang of nostalgia when I put a roll of 120 film into a Holga, used the numbers on the backing paper to advance the film, and licked the sealing paper of the exposed roll before I handed it in..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom