If you are shooting B&W ONLY and can only choose one, which one?

[narsuitus]

Film ... provided it is medium and/or large format film. I have never been satisfied with small format black & white images.

 

[shortstop]

Film ... provided it is medium and/or large format film. I have never been satisfied with small format black & white images.

The same for me, but I've recently tried PanF + summicron 50 in rodinal 1:50 11 min. enlarged 24x30 cm...mmmh, not bad.

 

[E.M]

I voted film , my digital is for color , but do also color with film .

 

[Pablito]

Shoot color digital and convert w/ SliverEfex - just to be contrary.

 

[Rayt]

For 120 and larger - film forever until I am dead.
For 135 and smaller - film until my stash runs out and then it will be digital.

 

[sector99]

B&W film because ...

A "File" is not ... and can't ever be a photograph.

Moreover, a "file" cannot be appreciated (in its entirety) without a giant electronic screen (15-20MP). Indeed, they don't yet exist—only $5000/each "4k" monitors (16:9; 2665X1500)—pushed hard now by SONY et al.

Furthermore, the hassle required to convert one's "file" into tangibility is no more difficult/expensive than to apply analog chemistry and subsequent digital conversion (hybrid process).

The basic NCPS/Rockwell scan is 15MP (3339X5035) so it's easy to digitize/convert one's permanently archived film for electronic/adjustment purposes.

IF one desires sub-6 micron resolution the wet drum scanner will oblige—however, few lens/film combinations could achieve such resolution and only for high contrast fine detail. The D800 even runs out of pixel density at that level—not to mention the pixel "gaps" causing further sensor noise as the MP levels rise.

A digital revolution? No Dear Readers...

A photograph isn't a "File"

... and a MONOCHROM might be attractive—however, it's entire ecosystem is obviously reserved for non-mortals, none of whom (it appears) are artists.

 

[Phothomas]

Black and white film. Because most of the time I shoot medium format. So the Monochrom wouldn´t be that useful for me. Although I´d love to try it...

Thomas

 

[traveler_101]

I voted film. I do b&w in film and color in digital--all of it is small format, 35mm in film, half frame in digital.

I consider the film work more interesting and creative and I have no interest in substituting digital for that.

 

[Dez.]

As much as I love film, I'd probably go with the M Monochrome simply for workflow reasons. Professionally, I just can't afford the time it takes to get film developed and proofed. For personal work, I just can't stand the smell of fixer 😉

 

[Ronald M]

Leica MM is appealing.

Film is fun if optical prints are made.

I have learned to like digital if I do not want prints

 

[Godfrey]

I like working with B&W film, but if I could only have one, color capture and render to B&W makes the most sense as it is more versatile.

G

 

[kxl]

I like working with B&W film, but if I could only have one, color capture and render to B&W makes the most sense as it is more versatile.

G

I have initially refrained from responding to my own poll, but after giving it a lot of thought, this is actually my preferred method.

I like B&W film as much as any typical RFF'er, but if limited to one method, the versatility of color capture followed by B&W conversion cannot be beat.

 

[paradoxbox]

BW film. why bother with a monochrom or any other digital camera. shoot in the rain with it often enough and eventually it'll die. or the battery will alert you to its uncharged state just as you're heading out to take some important or fantastic shots. etc. etc.

give me film and an m3 and i'll blast away in the middle of a typhoon without worrying the camera will die and cost me 10,000$ to replace.

why not color? i prefer the extra DR that black and white gives vs color.

 

[jjtelecaster]

If I can choose, film. Hands down.

Juan

 

[Michael Markey]

All of the above ... it depends.

 

[Ansel]

Analogue
Something that is analogous to something else

Digital
Relating to information that is stored in the form of the numbers 0 and 1

 

[2WK]

B&W film because ...

A "File" is not ... and can't ever be a photograph.

...

A digital revolution? No Dear Readers...

A photograph isn't a "File"

... and a MONOCHROM might be attractive—however, it's entire ecosystem is obviously reserved for non-mortals, none of whom (it appears) are artists.

Pfft what—ever.

I still enjoy shooting BW film. Mostly 120. But the rest of the time the "files" from the Monochrom are pretty unbelievable.

 

[Filson Back]

I recently did a comparison of a silver gelatin print made from 35mm film shot with a 'cron with a digital silver print made from a full-frame camera (RX1). To my surprise I found that the RX1 b/w print had MORE detail and was equally rich in dynamic range and 3-d rendering. I now turn down the clarity on digital files before I print; with true b/w they look about like a silver gelatin print from film. *Ducks.*

 

[Bruno Gracia]

I recently did a comparison of a silver gelatin print made from 35mm film shot with a 'cron with a digital silver print made from a full-frame camera (RX1). To my surprise I found that the RX1 b/w print had MORE detail and was equally rich in dynamic range and 3-d rendering. I now turn down the clarity on digital files before I print; with true b/w they look about like a silver gelatin print from film. *Ducks.*

Could You post a comparison image?

Thanks.

 

[silverbullet]

b&w film because the grain is like colophonium on a violin's bow and…. mother used film….. ;-)


klick von deandare06 auf Flickr