Will we all go digital?

Fabian

Fabian

Established
Local time
11:24 PM
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
109
Hello together

I have to say that I love classic b/w developing and printing.
But in maybe 5 years or so, when you can buy a m8 probably cheaper than a mp, and when the digital printing will be better than baryt in terms of archival questions, I may be tempted to give up film.

There is only one problem: i don't like the digital look.

The good thing about digital is the ongoing costs which would be really low compared to film.
I am afraid that the film stuff (papers and developers also) will become more and more expensive.

What do you think? What has to happen to make you give up film?


Fabian
 
I went digital 8 years ago. Didn't touch film for a very long time. Now I've gone back to film. Although I still have and use digital cameras, I shoot with them rarely. I don't find the look nor the process of digital imaging to be any where near as pleasing as film photography.
 
Fabian said:
There is only one problem: i don't like the digital look.
Click to expand...

Surely, Unless you change your mind, this on its own is the strongest reason for you to stick with film.

I don't mind digital colour at all, but I doubt I'll ever use digital for b&w again, regardless of sensor improvements - b&w film, even scanned, just has a specific look about it that is different and appealing. I'd completely given up film until a few months ago, but that was definitely a mistake.

Ian
 
Fabian said:
...
What do you think? What has to happen to make you give up film?...
Click to expand...
Hi,

what has to happen ... unavailability of film perhaps? ;)
Don't hope so.

As much other users I went digital a few years ago and now I'm back to film.
Digital sometimes is in use like a kind of Polaroid here. For quick snaps to mail or to print on the selphy. But there is no challenge in digital photography for me so it wouldn't help if there were a cheap rangefinder-body on the market.

Out of this its up to ourselves - buy film, buy chemicals and paper, employ the photo laboratories to show the world "we are still there and we do it!"

Regards, Axel
 
Last edited:
Necessity and convenience can be considerations. The agency which sells my work is digital. It makes sense to give it digital photos rather than scans of film. The people who do my film processing and printing are slip-shod as hell. Negatives are often not put back in their sleeves, at times they carry fingerprints, and so on. With digital pictures, there is nothing that can go wrong in this way. Prints from digital files are now more expensive in India than are prints from negatives: but this will certainly change in time.
 
I was anti-digital, film and processing prices, specially B&W, also lab mistakes, chemical spots and remains on your film, and the low quality they offer made me think once more...

I still prefer film, but i need to make some progress and i am not gonna make that with less than a roll/month for the whole semester and then when summer comes i'll make it up with as many rolls as i can, it's not working for me...I feel lost.

I tempted my mom into buying me one as a birthday gift and i got it, now it's all easy...At least i am not gonna have to experiment on film anymore.

As easy as it gets, it's sophisticated and i am much more relaxed with a fully mechanical camera, but everything has its plus, i'm not getting rid of my film cameras, and i am not gonna stop shooting film. I guess being an amateur beginner, more pro or advanced people will be using more film as a pleasure.

Technology means optimum performance and money savings, i can'y object to that, and we cannot resist the temptation. It's the difference between a can of peas and fresh ones...
 
I've used a digital camera, and don't see myself ever going back. There is nothing there. It'd be like trading my Mustang in on a Prius just for the new technology - it might be new tech, but it sure as hell isn't superior in any relevant way. The difference in gas consumption is minimal given my current mileage. I can see how it makes sense for some people, but then I've never thought long commutes made sense.

If I want convenience I shoot C-41, drop it off before dinner and pick it up when I'm through. Try that with digital :) I can afford to do this because I'm using bodies that accept lenses that are 50 years old and develop my own B&W rather than having to buy: Photoshop, ink carts, a new PC, bigger faster memory cards, bigger better printer, a new camera body, etc. every two years. And it's not like I care if I come out ahead in money spent on equipment, it's just I spend my money on things that last instead of temporary solutions.

It seems incredibly silly to me that a person might be interested in "saving the environment" on the one hand, but buying into disposable technology like it's a good idea.

BTW, digital printing won't ever be better than traditional means when it comes to archiving, but it may make use of traditional printing technology to achieve longevity. Oh wait, it already does: http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42611 :)
 
Digital rangefinders like the Epson and the Leica M8 are a good alternative to film. I have a DSLR and have never really developed any karma with it and couldn't seem to produce images that pleased me so I put it aside and concentrated on using film. I really like film but at the learning stage that I am at, I want to shoot a lot of images so it becomes somewhat expensive. My M8 hasn't converted me to digital but it has provided me with the opportunity to take a lot of shots without the cost of the throwaways ... I know it's a very expensive alternative but it is encouraging me to shoot more and a rangefinder is definitely more creative for me.

I have to keep using film though ... I get something from it that digital doesn't do for me. I think in the future I will probably do most of my 35mm stuff with the M8 and use medium and large format film. I like the thoughtfulness that has to go into a medium format image and the cost of the film is not too important to me if I'm not blazing away in 35mm!

As long as there is film around at a reasonable price I will want to keep using it! :)
 
Will we all go digital?

No. Simply because many of us will be dead before film is (I count myself among this group, and all but one of my grandparents lived into their 90's, my grandfather is now 102).

I've been forced into digital on many things and for the most part the end result is only a more difficult interface/process. Call me simple, but I'm sticking with analog.
 
Nope.

To quote another member's fine analogy,,,

DIGITAL = INSTANT COFFEE

Bleh!

No matter what happens to technology, what improvements are made...

I want to get my hands dirty...

Film photography = a craft
It's mentally and physically engaging...

Futzing with images in Photoshop?
No thanks...
Not a craft...
It's as fun and engaging as doing an Excel spreadsheet.

I don't want everything in my life to involve a PC, software, flash drives, USB cables, rechargable batteries... I love the independence of a film camera. A camera and some film - all you need.

Simple, reliable, tools...

Digital is to photography what Adobe Illustrator is to an illustration. Survey many, perhaps most, illustrators and they would rather create with a pen, inks, and some quality paper even if "on paper" the computerized technology matches or exceeds the simple traditional tools of the trade, or "makes things easier"...

,,,like "instant coffee"
 
Last edited:
Highly doubtful. The only digital I have is my phone at the moment and that's how it's going to stay. Takes interestingly good photos, though, for a phone.
 
What do you think? What has to happen to make you give up film?

H**l freezing over, flying pigs........you get my point
 
I personally think that those who are not applying silver nitrate to metal plates and fixing them with Potassium cyanide after carefully making a single exposure are big sissies and not true artists.

These negatives of tiny images on end scraps of old 35mm cine film is the lazy man's way out and certainly is not artistic or creative.
 
Will we all go digital?
Click to expand...
Oh yes, indeed. And I'm already back...

A short story about the "easy digital way"?

Today I had to order a spare-part what I didn't exactly know to fit to my car.
So my first plan was to take a digtal photo of the broken part and send it to the dealer by E-Mail.
But... a great lack of desire to take this small electronic monster named "Fuji F11", fight with the display-finder, swap memory card, load pictures, start application(s) to resize and optimize... drove me to phone the dealer and order the part on the direct way.

Obviously the costs for a long-distance call and a possible return couldn't seem horrible enough to grab the digicam ;)

So I spent some money but I saved my time and my energy.
Went out to shoot some film instead (no spare-parts!)

Regards, Axel
 
Last edited:
"Simple" film requires a huge, developed industrial base of chemicals, factories, raw materials, expenditures of energy to produce and process it.

Mechanical cameras require thousands of machined parts, complicated manufacturing processes and a gigantic chain of interelated companies that could only have arisen in the midst of an industrial age to create them.

The point being is that imaging is always produced with the technology of the day.

NOTHING is simple or independent.

Debates have raged every time a technical process has shifted.

You have the old guard railing about how "true craftsmanship" and art is being destroyed by the new-fangled widgets wielded by Philistines, and the avant-garde eagerly adopting the latest available.

Have you ever read old camera magazines from the 1930's, where "miniature" camera users were heaped with abuse and ridicule?

Reading these threads is like reading graffiti in Pompei. It's timeless and no original sentiments are expressed.
 
pedro.m.reis said:
Yes. Maybe not 100% but i'm certain that in 15 years all of us will be using digital in +90% of their fotos.
Click to expand...

All of us? Nope - not me. I don't see how anyone can say that. For example, digital is far easier than developing and printing a roll of black and white film. However, I enjoy the process of making a print from film using a film camera.

To me, for every so-called "advantage" of digital there are at least as many compromises and disadvantages. For example. Digital point and shooters? Forget it, you are and always will be asking me to give up selective focus due the the sensor size. An unreasonable constraint - a deal breaker. That constraint is due to the laws of physics and will always be the case. In addition most don't give you a usable ISO above 200. They cost around $250-350 last time I checked. They only last a few years before they break or become obsolete. Think of the fantastic classic film cameras you can get, with a great lens, perhaps even serviced, for the cost of a cheap "average" digital p&s.

That leaves me with DSLRs. Hate those things - big/indescrete cameras, futzy drop-down menus and tiny buttons, slow auto zooms lenses... oh, and the price. Very expensive for what they do. That leaves me with DRFs. Sorry, out of my price range, not worth the "crazy money" relavtive to their "advantages" over a film rangefinder.

Sorry - respectfully disagree. Time and technological advancements "within the next 5 years" won't change this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom