Film vs. digital

[jpdenk]

Originally Posted by Orgnoi1

I tend to use digital as a way of getting my "jobs" done at the museum... its easy and quick... and I can get decent results... when I want to go out for fun I (as of late) tend to pick up a 35mm and take the digital with me in case... I still love the feel of an old manual... and my Mamiya medium format rig... but to each their own... film makes me slow down and take my time... and PLAN shots... not just spray and pray...

If that's what works for you, that's great, but do keep in mind that the way that you use digital is not due to anything in the nature of digital capture. You've just decided to use it that way. One can work slowly and deliberately in digital also. You can set the camera for full manual operation, same as your film cameras.

If your results from digital are only "decent", then I suggest that you try slowing down and working with it a bit more.

John

[Orgnoi1]

Decent is a form of modesty... I dont tend to brag about my shots... no need to...

For the record since people havent seen my shots... really... IF I shoot 100 shots in a day I am pushing it... being a photojournalist (read: museum photographer) you HAVE to take a ton of shots... otherwise you may miss out on something going on...

[Bunyip]

Originally Posted by Orgnoi1

...I tend to use digital as a way of getting my "jobs" done at the museum... its easy and quick... and I can get decent results... when I want to go out for fun I (as of late) tend to pick up a 35mm and take the digital with me in case... I still love the feel of an old manual...

Dear Orgnoi1,

I'm with you: my sentiments precisely!

BTW, we occasionally have a TV programme, here in Oz, called "Trackside" (which showcases a variety of US railways, old and new (steam and diesel) and things to do with them. I'm sure one of the segments must have featured your workplace.

[DAVE PROUTY]

I don't shoot film anymore. I shot film for years, and processed it myself at the small pro lab I worked for (25 years). LOVED EVERY MINUTE OF IT!!! I would shoot film toda if I still had that job. But I don't. So I switched to digital.

Now, if you are all into "take your time, and shoot frugally", I have the digital solution for you. Use small cards that will give you only 36 or so exposures in RAW. Or smaller cards for shooting JPEGS. Of course, finding cards that small might be as hard as finding a roll of Kodachrome 25. But in essence the battery consumption becomes a smaller issue, and the mindset of shooting less frames for more "good" images will be equivalent to shooting 35mm. Even if you only do this as an excercise, it will be beneficial to you.

I have to admit, my Canon AE-1 sits in a box, and this banter about film gets my juices flowing enough to consider loading up that old monster and shooting a couple rolls for, and pardon the phrase, "old times sake".

As for Kodak having a 10 year plan for it's film production, I can't see anyone being able to anticipate film's future that far ahead. If the date for that 10 year plan was implemented 8 years ago, then maybe the end point of such a plan can be seen. But not from today. I remember only a few short years ago when digital was extremely costly and was considered not worthy of professional use due to the inferior imagery it produced, and professionals will continue to use film for the majority of the work they do. Even photographers who swore their Hasselblads would have to be torn from their cold dead hands made the switch. Monte Zucker was one of those in that category. He embraced digital, once he saw how it freed him from constraints he felt he had with film.

Is film dead? No, not yet. But don't hold your breathe for film to become the staple it once was, again. Not likely to happen. The speed with which technology advances, we may in the not too distant future be arguing digital over... the next system. Time will tell.

As to the aesthetics of film over digital. I have heard for many years in the "film age" if you will, how we wanted less grain from our films. Even ISO flexibility in film within a roll, like that C41 B/W film from... AGFA? Can't remember whose film it was. But then digital came along and satisfied those much wanted traits. So, what do we then say about digital... "I miss the grain of film!" We are such hypocrits. As for quality of images, I have seen 16x20's from a Fuji Finepix S2 Pro that were as crisp and full of tonality as any Hasselblad neg printed to the same size. I think I can judge that, since I have printed scores of MF negatives in my time. So that argument doesn't wash with me.

Film or digital.

Makes no difference to me what anyone wants to shoot. I just hope that whatever you choose, go out and shoot. After all, that is the true goal. Create some great photographs. Either method will accomplish that task. One just needs to get out and shoot. As Yoda said, "Do, or do not. There is no try."

[williamkazak]

I don't know what to make of it any more. I use my Nikon D300 bodies more than ever for weddings and snapshots. My beautiful F6 seems to sit there now.