Digital versus Film

[Amelia G]

How do you feel about digital technology for photos and movies vs. traditional film technologies?

[SindelChaos]

I like both...it all depends on what kind of look you are going for.

[LrdSatanas]

the posibilities of digital are endless.

[ForrestBlack]

the posibilities of digital are endless.

And film perhaps even moreso.

[Tequila Zaire]

And film perhaps even moreso.

How so? I've only worked with digital mainly so I'm not all that tuned in as to the benefits of film over digital...cause in term of ecenomics and ease of use I'm not seeing why one wouldn't make the switch.

[karyn]

How so? I've only worked with digital mainly so I'm not all that tuned in as to the benefits of film over digital...cause in term of ecenomics and ease of use I'm not seeing why one wouldn't make the switch.

if a girl were both free and easy, you might feel like you would get something more worthwhile from someone you had to put a little more effort into

[HempKnight]

I actually miss working in the darkroom.. something about it all.
Beyond the actual just shooting a subject but being part of the entire creation process.

I still love to work in black and white but haven't had good luck with some of the C-41 films, there are a couple that I like but still lacking the same grain and depth of real b&w, too clean I guess, not very raw and gritty like it should be. (I still like Tri-X 400, T-Max, HP5... etc. but not very many local labs for processing) Although I do like the results from the Agfa Signum Monochrome RA paper

With the massive movement towards digital, with the affordability and software available, it leaves the true skill of being a photograper behind and makes digital artists out of more people. Besides Amelia and Forrest, if you ask a handful of people what an f-stop is, you'd get more shrugs than answers.

I've worked with film and digital and like both but for different reasons and different uses, I have yet to find a printer to make a hard copy digital print of 16x20 or bigger (something other than the Stylus Pro series ranging from $3k to $10k)... or a way to shoot large format film. proof, print and post online in the same day without an exhaustion of time, effort and money.

I would never give up my Hassleblad, Leica or Cannon over a new digital camera... still waiting for the 100 megapixel cameras to hit the market and once affordable, would consider working more with digital formats... but until then, I still like film and all it offers for it's uses as well as digital does for other purposes.

[postcoital]

All photographers I know have both digital and film cameras, but use the film ones for photoshootings and the digitals for snapshots, so I guess there must be some reason for it, which I don't know, since I'm not a photographer.
I'm fine with digital, because I mostly need it to take photos for textures, and that's a pain in the ass (and in the wallet) with a film cam.

[One Eyed Cat]

I look at it the same way I look at analog and digital sound. The direct manipulations you can make with analog/ film are greater. The colors/sound tend to have more warmth and greater natural contrasts. Digital and cds are more convenient. I think with digicams more people are able to take and edit pictures and video more to their liking. It levels the playing fields in some senses; you can essentially produce movies, photo albums, and soundtracks on a computer now. Analog and film still have their advantages, tho.


OEC

[HempKnight]

All photographers I know have both digital and film cameras, but use the film ones for photoshootings and the digitals for snapshots, so I guess there must be some reason for it, which I don't know, since I'm not a photographer.
I'm fine with digital, because I mostly need it to take photos for textures, and that's a pain in the ass (and in the wallet) with a film cam.

For the same reason why we used to use Polaroids along with 35mm SLRs... to check composition, lighting, framing shots and such... plus shooting professionally for a client, it's nice to have something for them to preview instantly.

[Tequila Zaire]

if a girl were both free and easy, you might feel like you would get something more worthwhile from someone you had to put a little more effort into

Total bullshit...it's nowhere near the same kind of reasoning.

Working in all digital does not magicaly take the hard work away since it's just as hard for a variety of diffrent reasons. The programs are just as demanding as spending hours in a darkroom. The same level of talent is required along with an ability to work within and beyond what the tools given allow.

I liked the darkroom days I had in college but realisticly I knew I had to move on to the digital realm...something I am facing in my own work today.

What I mean by ecenomics has nothing to do with Amater Vs. Pro...slut Vs. High priced call girl. I'll give you an example from my work.

Traditionally all I did was pencil illustration (character designs mainly) and my art store bill was in the hundreds every 3 months or so. The market began to change where the more work you could do yourself the more work you would get...instead of working with an inker and colorist it was advised I do it myself...so I began to do that. I began to experiment with pen and ink...this added to my art store bill.

At the same time many were going full on digital since the cost of working analog was just too high for many to make any money...plus speed, quality, and freedom to experiment were higher. Right now it's even more desired since you skip a lot of time and money consuming prep workl......NONE of this sacrifices the final work. Coloring has been digital for years so it made sense inking and pencil would follow....

Switching to digital inking and penciling is saving me a lot of cash...and allowing me to take chances and experiment a lot more since I no longer have the fear of fucking up pencil work I've spent so much time on...or having to wait for ink to dry to continue working.

This is a SMALL part of going digital but a major one on my wallet...it's not easier in terms of actually doing the work...it does not do anything for me like make my art 100 times better...it simply allows me to work cheaper, experiment more, and focus on it with a grater degree of options. It can't however do all my work for me...it has given me an insane level of tools and options...many that normally require a ton of time to pull off traditionally...but it has not made one line for me without ME saying so.

It's a set of tools...not a magic box...digital tools have not made mediocre artists great ones...it just does not work that way. The basic core realities of art still apply...if you don't understand form and structure a program won't make up for it...it can't make your weaknesses a strength.

Can I ink faster and with more confidence? Yeah...can it tell me if I am putting the ink in the right places to give the sense of depth or drama I am after? Nope...neither can working all analog and traditional.

It's damn nice not having to go to art stores though of spending hours fixing inked pages that had minor but labor intensive mistakes.

[ForrestBlack]

Resolution at a chemical level just can not be beaten in terms of quality, it just requires skill. Digital is easy and cheap and occasionally powerful. But, I kinda think the top ten film photographers would crush the top ten digital photographers, unless the measure was cost efficiency or perhaps the speed of the job. Don't get me wrong, they each have their place though.

[Nightingale]

I collect film photographs (from way before digital was anything more than the number of fingers on a hand), but prefer using a digital camera for the web.

[morbid_lady]

for taking pictures i like film, for some reason i just like being able to have the actual photos rather than documents....it could be that time i had a digit, it opened, the batteries fell out and i lost all my pics.

[Nightingale]

for taking pictures i like film, for some reason i just like being able to have the actual photos rather than documents....it could be that time i had a digit, it opened, the batteries fell out and i lost all my pics.

Reminds me of my heart attack moment last week. The software on my computer did a nosedive from a great height and didn't stop at the ground. I had about 1000 pictures stored there, mainly for the web site. I had to go to the kodak web site and download the software from scratch (meaning, clear old software, insert new). Heart attack rescinded when I found that the images had been preserved despite the glitch.

[morbid_lady]

Reminds me of my heart attack moment last week. The software on my computer did a nosedive from a great height and didn't stop at the ground. I had about 1000 pictures stored there, mainly for the web site. I had to go to the kodak web site and download the software from scratch (meaning, clear old software, insert new). Heart attack rescinded when I found that the images had been preserved despite the glitch.

that happened to a friend of mine, cept with karoke files, he had over 20,000 of em in his computer (hes a kj in town), which was about 3 years work. unfortunately he did lose them all, and didnt have em on backup disks.

[Kidthorazine]

i prefer fillm because it give a sharper resolution and you can use it to get lighting effects that look terrible on a digital camera but digital is cool because you can do all sorts of stuff to the photos without having to scan them

[Tequila Zaire]

Resolution at a chemical level just can not be beaten in terms of quality, it just requires skill. Digital is easy and cheap and occasionally powerful. But, I kinda think the top ten film photographers would crush the top ten digital photographers, unless the measure was cost efficiency or perhaps the speed of the job. Don't get me wrong, they each have their place though.

Indeed they do...if we're taking art photography then yes...but in say journalism...then digital rises above simply due to the impact the format has made. It's quite interesting how digital film has effected new gathering and the implications it now has.

[Tequila Zaire]

that happened to a friend of mine, cept with karoke files, he had over 20,000 of em in his computer (hes a kj in town), which was about 3 years work. unfortunately he did lose them all, and didnt have em on backup disks.

Owch...that's pretty irresponsible though not to have backups. Anyone that works digital should take the time to invest either in some sort of raid configuration or at least an external drive for back ups...or at the very least a DVD or CD burner.

[darki]

film feels better, maybe because it's more real...
(or just more organic?)
I feel that restoring this kind of feeling in a digital way takes a lot of patience and skill.
(but maybe that's just another illusion)

[bre.star]

i am a huge fan of digital, considering without it i would not be able to make my own home movies and edit them on my computer. i really like film though because it looks so much better.

[HempKnight]

Indeed they do...if we're taking art photography then yes...but in say journalism...then digital rises above simply due to the impact the format has made. It's quite interesting how digital film has effected new gathering and the implications it now has.

In the realm of photojournalism, you have to work in digital... I can't think of a newspaper that still has a darkroom in operation... and long gone are the days of typesetters as well. A forum that relies on speed and accuracy, digital is the way to go... transmitting photos and text from the field is an invaluable resource bringing the print media up to speed with broadcast, especially now that most newspapers have an online edition that brings you the news in most cases even before other sources.

And with the technology of digital cameras it makes it possible for photojournalist to carry much less equipment, I would be hard pressed to be able to use my SLR to gain up to an 800x zoom that I can with my digital, instantly. Most professionals that I know still use film cameras with their digitals, shooting most of the film for other projects or for personal collection and use their digitals for work assignments.

Each has its place and unlike the way of 8 track tapes, LPs and Betamax, film has been around for a long time and will continue for quite some time more. It's the same kind of debate that came about when the auto exposure cameras were released and then again when the auto focus cameras hit the market, it doesn't automate the entire process but makes the job a little easier in certain aspects and opens up venues for people into a new hobby or line of work that otherwise they would have never attempted.

[Nightingale]

....opens up venues for people into a new hobby or line of work that otherwise they would have never attempted.

I've found that with my photographic competition; more people are becoming interested simply because of the ease with which they can use a digital camera, and still get prints through their local photo trader or online. Trouble is, this year we've seen the first digitally worked photographs - someone trying to improve the effects of their picture with the use of photoshop or similar, and that tends to ruin the photographic pleasure somewhat.

[HempKnight]

I've found that with my photographic competition; more people are becoming interested simply because of the ease with which they can use a digital camera, and still get prints through their local photo trader or online. Trouble is, this year we've seen the first digitally worked photographs - someone trying to improve the effects of their picture with the use of photoshop or similar, and that tends to ruin the photographic pleasure somewhat.

Exactly what I had meant by my statement earlier of with digital it leaves the photographer behind and makes more digital artists of people... not saying that neither is skillful, there are some wonderful photographers and digital artists as well... but a big difference.

Considering I can take a digital shot and add lens flare or backlighting, a slew of effects and whatnot from my chair.... or I can take out the SLR and do my work with lens filters, lights and darkroom techniques... either way I have to have the skill to know how to manipulate the tools to produce the desired effect.

I agree with what your saying, there are in too many cases where you find someone has taken a shot and heaped on 30 layers of filters and effects bringing the shot into something of the unreal... unless that is what you are going for, it's not a pretty picture.

[Nightingale]

I agree with what your saying, there are in too many cases where you find someone has taken a shot and heaped on 30 layers of filters and effects bringing the shot into something of the unreal... unless that is what you are going for, it's not a pretty picture.

The photoshopped pictures (2) that we received attempted to improve on a sunset shot through the use of excessive red/orange and excessive blue/purple (one for each). The shadow effect for the houses (silhouette) was compromised as a result, and the overuse of the extra colouring ruined what could have been a subtle shading effect.

[Forestghost]

I'm lazy and hate bad pictures of myself. Digital makes me happy because it's instant and correctable. If someone uses my digital camera to take a bad picture of me, I can erase it before anyone else sees it! I don't like having to wait for a 1 hour photo place to develop my pics, I'm much happier sorting through them at home, then bringing the ones I pick in to be "developed".
So yeah, Digital all the way (unless I decided to become a serious photographer one day, then I will likely change my tune!)

[Tequila Zaire]

Each has its place and unlike the way of 8 track tapes, LPs and Betamax,

Vynil LP's are still around...they are a staple of the DJ scene so don't count them out just yet. Though the same debate is going on in that scene as well as new digital possibilities open up trying not so much to replace vynil but go a step beyond it...has not been quite as easy though.

[ForrestBlack]

I'm lazy and hate bad pictures of myself. Digital makes me happy because it's instant and correctable. If someone uses my digital camera to take a bad picture of me, I can erase it before anyone else sees it! I don't like having to wait for a 1 hour photo place to develop my pics, I'm much happier sorting through them at home, then bringing the ones I pick in to be "developed".
So yeah, Digital all the way (unless I decided to become a serious photographer one day, then I will likely change my tune!)

You could contact the negs, pick the ones you like, and have a pro print them correctly for you, or shoot slides. One hour photo places tend to pick one frame from the set, adjust the settings for that frame, and assume it's correect for the rest of the roll. That's why you usually have a few good looking pictures in a roll and the rest are frequently kinda crappy. To some degree, holding one hour film processing up as the example of traditional photography would be like holding your camera phone up as the example of digital photography. But yes, convenience is a factor and easy pictures are frequently enjoyable.

[MistressJennifer]

Digital tends to look more STARK, and film tends to look a bit WARMER...

But the real test is coming, I am doing a photo shoot next weekend and it will be FILM verses DIGITAL. The photographer is bringing both, plus good old black and white film.

I think so far, I like the look of film better. But if I ever get some really nice digital pics, I will change my mind. But film has a real magic to it. Maybe it's like reality is digital, and fantasy is film... Maybe...

[Nightingale]

But the real test is coming, I am doing a photo shoot next weekend and it will be FILM verses DIGITAL. The photographer is bringing both, plus good old black and white film.

Will we be permitted to judge the end results, purely for the furtherance of science, you understand.

[HempKnight]

Vynil LP's are still around...they are a staple of the DJ scene so don't count them out just yet. Though the same debate is going on in that scene as well as new digital possibilities open up trying not so much to replace vynil but go a step beyond it...has not been quite as easy though.

But as far as general consumer consumption... it's not a popular format. I still own over 700 LPs and wouldn't give them up for CDs ever... especially since most of them have never been remastered and/or released on CD anyhow... but then again, I still have 8 tracks too

I've used one of the Tascam TT M1 Turntable Scratch Controller for CDs... very cool shit, check one out if you have the chance.

[MistressJennifer]

Will we be permitted to judge the end results, purely for the furtherance of science, you understand.

Yes of course, a scientific study... But don't look too close, this is REALLY the latex dress I repaired with crazy glue. I swear, I don't even know if this dress will make it through the shoot. If it really falls apart, I will just rip the whole thing up, and make it sort of a "distressed punk" look...

[Nightingale]

Yes of course, a scientific study... But don't look too close, this is REALLY the latex dress I repaired with crazy glue. I swear, I don't even know if this dress will make it through the shoot. If it really falls apart, I will just rip the whole thing up, and make it sort of a "distressed punk" look...

I have no doubt that, should it begin to disintegrate, hundreds of helping hands will be all over you ...