DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Digital vs. film
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 15 of 15, (reverse)
AuthorThread
03/10/2005 06:14:09 PM · #1
Im curious to see who is still using film and for what. Do you prefer film, or digital? Why... what about the idea of combining the two ie: film scanners or digital slide printers?

Me personally I am still primarily using film because I havent gotten my Rebel xt yet (almost have enough money saved up... Stupid starving student artist)
03/10/2005 06:18:31 PM · #2
I was using film till I got my Canon 1D mark II. Now all digital..
03/10/2005 06:20:30 PM · #3
gee i wonder why.... Serious money, serious equipment
03/10/2005 06:24:16 PM · #4
Originally posted by mrmojo:

gee i wonder why.... Serious money, serious equipment


If you are serious about something do it in a serious way.
03/10/2005 06:25:24 PM · #5
Just recently (last 6 months) started shooting film. Still a digital baby but use film for landscape stuffs.
03/10/2005 06:31:04 PM · #6
hey nice site davenit, alot of nice shots, especially some of your studio stuff, and the infrared... I need to get back in gear and get my site back up so people can see more of my work besides a few challenge shots from a slightly better than point and shoot camera. Dont get me wrong I have seen alot better than what I have done for less, but Im still on a learning curve with this thing.
03/10/2005 06:36:24 PM · #7
I still use film once in a while on a really old manual camera. I like to do the thinking and calculate and compose the shots. I enjoy seeing the processed slides more than anything and that's one of the reasons I do it. It also helps me stop shooting absolute rubbish.
03/10/2005 06:37:39 PM · #8
Originally posted by xion:

I still use film once in a while on a really old manual camera. I like to do the thinking and calculate and compose the shots. I enjoy seeing the processed slides more than anything and that's one of the reasons I do it. It also helps me stop shooting absolute rubbish.


I wish I still had the eyesite to do that.
03/10/2005 07:08:37 PM · #9
I use film for B/W and slides, I develop B/W myself at school so I just do it for fun, but I got the 20D and shoot most of my pictures on my digital (about 1000 pics pr. month) but only 36 B/W on film

Message edited by author 2005-03-10 19:09:48.
03/10/2005 07:23:32 PM · #10
I shoot both equally probably. Since my school allows me access to medium format now I've learned that and am having fun with it. I got lucky to be in the class considering I'm not an art major. I'm going on a surf trip soon and will probably shoot just as many slides with my old K1000 as I shoot pics with my D70. I find the volume I shoot on digital isn't too much more than with film. I still take the time to compose and think about my shots, and the only way I shoot more is if I am bracketing more I guess, or I if I am shooting a concert-which I haven't done much of since re-enrolling at the university.

Printing my own color shots off of an enlarger has given me new appreciation for the ease of color correction etc. in photoshop.

Message edited by author 2005-03-10 19:25:15.
03/10/2005 07:29:19 PM · #11
No more film for me. I really donĂ¢€™t like film at all, I've shot it since 1972 and have no desire to shoot any more. I do have a film scanner, a DiMAGE Scan Dual III, but it can not get as good a image off a piece of 35mm film that I can get from my F828 and the 20D blows my film photos away. I did a bunch of tests between my 35mm film SLR and the Sony F828 and the Sony made better looking prints. The film camera has more detail when viewed at the pixel level but when printed the film looked pretty soft.

03/12/2005 07:16:52 AM · #12
I still use film for landscapes. Scanning Fuji Velvia at 4000 dpi I get 3x or more the linear resolution with my 6cm x 7cm film than I do with an 8 megapixel camera - that translates into 276 MB files instead of 22 MB files. As great as this is, this extra resolution is really not much value until a print gets significantly larger than 11x14. I've not done any experiments to see at what size the advantage becomes clear. Compared to my old and not very expensive 35mm film camera and lenses, I think my 8 megapixel camera does a better job, on average Again, no side by side comparisons here. Anyone with a great 35mm setup might disagree.

I like to be able to edit digitally using Photoshop because I understand the tools and I imagine they are more flexible, repeatable, and forgiving (there is no UNDO for most darkroom procedures.)
03/12/2005 08:54:44 AM · #13
I still use both for shooting, but do all of my post-production work in the digital domain. So, all film gets scanned by my Nikon 8000 scanner into the computer for processing, correction, manipulation and enhancement. Printing chores are sent to a dye sub (Olympus 400) or inkjet (Canon i9900 or Epson Stylus Photo EX) printers.

Besides Nikon 35mm cameras, I have a Hasselblad X-Pan 35mm and two Hasselblad 501CM medium format cameras. There is no better digital image from the technical perspective than the 6cm x 6cm scanned at 4k x 4k and then down res'd to a JPEG. It defeats all efforts from my Nikon D100 or older D1Xs.

I just took delivery of the higher res D2X, so once some images are recorded I will learn if it can beat the film to digital workflow?
03/14/2005 02:51:44 AM · #14
i think i use film more overall, but film is where i really have fun.

if im doing sports, i actually prefer film right now becuase the grain of 1600 fuji is less than the grain of 1600iso D100, and it's less distracting. ive gotten better sports photos with film than i have with digital. any type of low light stuff i have to do with film, mainly because i have a lot of fast lenses and no digital slr body. most of my 'artistic' stuff is on film, because i still think between the dynamic range and the color reproduction, high quality negative or slide film beats digital.

now, this isnt to say i dont enjoy digital a lot. the freedom to experiment is wonderful, and it encourages me to get shots that i wouldnt be too keen on trying with film.

scanners are bad news for me. the film scanner we have at work is terrible. (some old sony one) and the flatbed i have at home doesnt have enough detail for me. id love a coolscan, but id rather put that money towards a d70.

post production stuff i really only do on the computer, but what i have done in the darkroom, even though its not as technically good (from my lack of experiance) is just so much more satisfying that i would love to have a darkroom of my own. developing and printing your own film by hand gives you much more of an attachment to your work that i think digital lacks. so even though it will become a smaller and smaller share of the market, i for one hope film stays around forever, if nothing else as a craft.
03/14/2005 03:15:28 AM · #15
Yep still use film the new velvia 100 is a good reason to its awesome film, that and provia makes me feel like a pig in you know what.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 10/07/2025 08:11:05 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 10/07/2025 08:11:05 AM EDT.