One good reason film is better than digital

[Krasnaya_Zvezda]

This won't happen to you with a film camera, that's for sure.

"Hey everyone, I need your help. My camera is missing! On Thursday I was passing it around letting people look at pictures, and I do not know where it ended up. It is a cannon 400 , digital camera wallet size. If anyone has seen it or accidentally picked it up, please email me or call me."


This email was sent institution-wide at the University for which I work, I hope the poor girl recovers her "Cannon".

 

[cp_ste.croix]

and at least as far as i'm concerned, though i'm always seen with a camera, not too many ever get to see my pics, thus creating the illusion that i am a way beter photographer than i actually am... 🙂

 

[Stephan]

Hehehe... same here dude... a LOT of picture get deleted just after they were taken if I dont like the results 🙂

 

[xcapekey]

yeh...that's one thing i like about shooting film...no people going "oooh oooh ooh let me see" while you're trying to shoot

 

[dominicLF]

I was recently out on a camping trip with a bunch of school kids taking pictures with my wooden pinhole camera--just a wooden box with some film inside. The kids all rushed around after I corked the shutter hole (yes, a wooden box with a rubber stopper for a shutter) and wanted to see the pictures! They did this every time I made a 30-second exposure.

 

[Allen Gilman]

Oh sweeeeeet!! Another thread about why film is better than digital!!!!

 

[cp_ste.croix]

Oh sweeeeeet!! Another thread about why film is better than digital!!!!

I take it that you're tired of this then? I think us film shooters are the new persecuted class, and as such, feel the need to justify our choice loudly sometimes 😉

 

[Allen Gilman]

Ahh, persecution - that's where this is coming from... 😛

 

[Socke]

Yeah! The joke is a good one, especialy as I tend to leave my cell phone everywhere. At least I can call my phone and ask where it is when somebody answers it 🙂

Another reason for a phone cam!

 

[WDG]

I take it that you're tired of this then? I think us film shooters are the new persecuted class, and as such, feel the need to justify our choice loudly sometimes 😉

I feel no need to justify my choice... It's those who want me to change that have their work cut out! 😀

 

[dominicLF]

Ahh, persecution - that's where this is coming from... 😛

Well, there's that, but also the fact that film IS better than digital 😀

 

[kiev4a]

Just returned from vacation in the Pacific NW. Virtually every place we stopped I was the only person shooting film -- everyone else point and shoot digital. And everywhere we went the digital shooters were hunched down under a tree of by a tall rock, trying to find enough shade so they could see their lcd displays and tell if the last picture shot was any good.

One day we were on a cruise on a north Idaho Lake. One of our companions was a well-known romance writer. She was armed with a fairly high end digital point and shoot. It was a sunny day. She observed, "I spent a thousand dollars on this camera so I could immediately see what I shot. But if the sun is out I can't see a God damed thing! Next time I'm bringing my old Canon AE-1!"

 

[cp_ste.croix]

you know, i just got back from Victoria on Vancouver Island (for those of you who know) where, coincidentally the Tall Ships were in harbour. I was totally surprised that old, FD SLRs were the rule rather than the exception. Sure there was some digital there, but I was astounded that 2/3 cameras I saw were these old, great, slrs. No rf's though 🙁

I spent more time commenting on all of the cameras than the ships (which didn't really interest me for some reason)

Not all is lost...

 

[Krasnaya_Zvezda]

I actually did not intend to start another "film vs digital" thread. I merely thought the circumstance of the girl with the missing camera was rather humorous (I'm certain she would disagree) and definitely a problem confined to digital shooters (of which I am also).

But I absolutely wouldn't pass my Digilux 2 around from hand to hand so that some klutz could scratch, drop, or otherwise break it, or even abscond with it.

I might, though, if I had a "Cannon". 😉

 

[parks5920]

For myself, I found that with digital I began to rely on quantity rather than quality. Hell, with a 2 GB card in my canon I could fire off 20 to 30 shots in a matter of seconds - At least one would turn out good. I enjoy that fact that I have to think before I press the release. Now it seems I'm getting 20 to 30 good shots, with a few junkers in between. 🙂

Jason

 

[Kin Lau]

But I absolutely wouldn't pass my Digilux 2 around from hand to hand so that some klutz could scratch, drop, or otherwise break it, or even abscond with it.

I wouldn't hand my film camera around either. Neither digital nor film can handle being dropped very well. Finger prints are also another nuisance, handing prints out also seem to attract this. If I ever wanted to finger-print my friends, all I have to do is pass a few photos around.

 

[Krasnaya_Zvezda]

I wouldn't hand my film camera around either. Neither digital nor film can handle being dropped very well.

Well yeah, but why would you hand around your film camera? Nothing for the assembled masses to look at.

Finger prints are also another nuisance, handing prints out also seem to attract this. If I ever wanted to finger-print my friends, all I have to do is pass a few photos around.

How well I know this. I will never forget, in the early '90s I took a trip somewhere, shot a few rolls of film. I was letting my Dad have a look at the prints, and I wasn't paying alot of attention... then I looked around and saw him lick his thumb in order to shuffle through the stack! I said, as nice as I could, "Hey don't do that!" (Not very nice, was it?) He looked at me and said, "What? They're just pictures!"
Instantly, a thought burned itself into my brain: "Next time, shoot slides.
When he handed the stack over to my Mother, he said to her in a mocking tone, "Don't lick your thumb!"

 

[kiev4a]

you know, i just got back from Victoria on Vancouver Island (for those of you who know) where, coincidentally the Tall Ships were in harbour. I was totally surprised that old, FD SLRs were the rule rather than the exception. Sure there was some digital there, but I was astounded that 2/3 cameras I saw were these old, great, slrs. No rf's though 🙁

I spent more time commenting on all of the cameras than the ships (which didn't really interest me for some reason)

Not all is lost...

I was on the other side of the Strait of Juan de Fuca at the same time. In fact, we stopped in our way up to Cape Flattery caught a glimpse of a three-masted ship disappearing behind a point, headed east -- probably for Vancouver. I can see why one would be more likely to see film cameras at a tall ship festival. The people there are likely to be more focused than the average tourist who just takes an occassional snapshot.

 

[Stephan]

I take it that you're tired of this then? I think us film shooters are the new persecuted class, and as such, feel the need to justify our choice loudly sometimes 😉

Lol.... its natural selection dude... they're out to get you 😀


(I'm on the dark side of digital... PS is my friend, my precious, yeeeeeeess 😀 )

 

[Kin Lau]

Well yeah, but why would you hand around your film camera? Nothing for the assembled masses to look at.

The Kodak No.1 Autographic gets a few "ooh's", as does the TLR, along with the "can I see's?" The Leica IIIa gets the "can I see that", but usually from people with some appreciation, so I don't mind them handling it.