Film

Anouilh

Although I am very pleased with my new Digital Rebel (Canon EOS 400d), I think my Pentax MZ 50 takes photos that will survive the test of time. When I started analysing digital photos, I found the overall effect "syrupy". It would be helpful to know what others think.http://www.flickr.com/photos/anouilh/2564393895/in/photostream/http://forums.cnet.com/5208-6035_102-0.html?forumID=77&threadID=190280&messageID=2063632

Mellor

The Pentax MZ 50 was good, but I found the controls of EOS Digital rebel much better.
I still have both but am selling the Pentax as I never use is anymore. Even if the picture quaility of the pentax is better, I think that the digital advantage more than makes up for this.
(By digital advantage I mean, instant reviewing, PP'ing etc)

Anouilh

There's a lot of debate about this, especially in some Flickr groups. One aspect of film will ensure that I continue to use it. Bringing film to a shop is a social activity and adds to the experience of taking photos, if only in a roundabout way. I was advised to go to Gunns on Wexford Street in Dublin and arrived to find a lively group of enthusiasts filling the place. It was like a scene from one of Saul Bellow's novels and would have made a wonderful photo.

snellers

mmmmm...film vs digital debate? ...not sure if boards has discussed this one before? :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Anouilh

The "either/or" aspect of the debate does not interest me much. I came across a petition composed by the Flickr Polaroid Group this morning and found it interesting to think that in time many technologies will become unavailable and that for some people this is a genuine loss.
I find it interesting and while it may have been discussed in the past here, I am new to Boards.ie.http://www.petitiononline.com/insfil07/petition.html

RealEstateKing

digital is better for everything, in terms of: take as many pix as you like, PS things, no development costs, instant reviewing etc.

THe only advantage of film is that burnt out highlights on film look better than burnt out highlights on digital. When you get areas of digital that are just 100% white it looks cack.

And the major advantage for me: Slides.

I love being able to load up a carousel of slides, crack open a bottle of wine, stick on some music and talk about the pictures: Thats missing in digital, until somebody inventes 25 megapixel cameras and 25 megapixel projectors.

Hugh_C

RealEstateKing wrote: »

digital is better for everything, in terms of: take as many pix as you like, PS things, no development costs, instant reviewing etc.

That's the weakness of digital for me - I think the fact that film has an overhead makes you think about the picture a bit more than with digital. That's how it is for me anyway, because each exposure on the mf costs me about about €1.50

Oh, and it looks way better and you can stick a scan through photoshop if you need to. Film will always have a place in photography.

RealEstateKing

That's the weakness of digital for me - I think the fact that film has an overhead makes you think about the picture a bit more than with digital. That's how it is for me anyway, because each exposure on the mf costs me about about €1.50

True enough: I hate the way with digital I end up snapping hundreds of pictures when abroad, instead of just taking it in and enjoying myself!

That said, in my film days, I often missed out on good pics, cause I'd only take out the camera when light was optimal and there was something really spectacular.

Love the happy acidents, particularly of people doing stuff at festivals or in crowds, that you get when your just snapping away.

Mellor

Hugh_C wrote: »

That's the weakness of digital for me - I think the fact that film has an overhead makes you think about the picture a bit more than with digital. That's how it is for me anyway, because each exposure on the mf costs me about about €1.50

Oh, and it looks way better and you can stick a scan through photoshop if you need to. Film will always have a place in photography.

When you have the ability to a good standard, film will result in a higher ratio of good (even great) pics, as you will try to get each perfect.

But, when you are learning, digital is better.
Almost every aspect of basic photography can be shot, and reviewed instantly. You will learn much quicker this way.
My first every roll on a film slr was terrible, as I had the SS too long, the Av too small etc. When I printed a week later, I looked at the photo and I had no way to tell why it was wrong. I couldn't tell which photos were which (bar the obvious ones), learning like that was harder

Thirdfox

Mellor wrote: »

When you have the ability to a good standard, film will result in a higher ratio of good (even great) pics, as you will try to get each perfect.

But, when you are learning, digital is better.
Almost every aspect of basic photography can be shot, and reviewed instantly. You will learn much quicker this way.
My first every roll on a film slr was terrible, as I had the SS too long, the Av too small etc. When I printed a week later, I looked at the photo and I had no way to tell why it was wrong. I couldn't tell which photos were which (bar the obvious ones), learning like that was harder

+1... 1 year and 22000 photos later I'm now at the stage that I will go out with a visualised image in my head or at least visualise a scene in a photographic way before taking it.

22000 exposures on film would have been a pretty costly expenditure!

Anouilh

Mellor wrote: »

But, when you are learning, digital is better.
Almost every aspect of basic photography can be shot, and reviewed instantly. You will learn much quicker this way.
My first every roll on a film slr was terrible, as I had the SS too long, the Av too small etc. When I printed a week later, I looked at the photo and I had no way to tell why it was wrong. I couldn't tell which photos were which (bar the obvious ones), learning like that was harder

I did not have a digital camera when I started trying to improve in photography.

I started off by having some very good photographers like Blather, Elimare, Commando, Miss W. Tod and Magicbastard help me out. (These are names worth doing a search for, as their work is very lively.)
For a while I thought they were all mathematical geniuses, as I was wandering round with paper and pencil, recording the f stopping and all the rest of the AV and TV details on my Pentax Mz 50, not realising that digital gives all this instantly, along with the histogram reading.
As it turned out, this two year training made digital much easier, as I had learned the language necessary to communicate.

However, being self taught has its amusing aspects. I bought at tripod under my virtual tutors instruction. Not realising that it had extendible legs, I spent a month crawling round on my knees and shooting my subjects from some very odd angles, pointing upwards. Compliments poured in and I was told that my work had improved greatly...