Eric T
Well-known
I mostly shoot digital. But I enjoy developing film and the price of many spectacular film cameras is incredibly low. But if I really need an image and I need it fast, I always use digital.
dreamsandart
Well-known
Just to make sure… I don't mean this to be a digital vs film thing, I feel they both have their place.
One area of use I've gone very digital and don't feel I have a problem with is the 'family snap-shots' or 'for others' as as poster 'still hunter' says. The Leica D-LUX 4 was a revelation in its compact take every where and not worry about size, image quality, and ease to use. The getting it on the computer, viewing images and sending to family/friends, it just 'works'.
As for my personal more 'art-thought' camera use. One problem I've identified is 'time'. Besides the new digital M-series compared to the film cameras, maybe the biggest change in photography in the past few years in my personal life has been my young sons. One needs TIME to get out and 'do it', and that is one thing I've had less of. Can I fit film into my [changed] time schedule?
One area of use I've gone very digital and don't feel I have a problem with is the 'family snap-shots' or 'for others' as as poster 'still hunter' says. The Leica D-LUX 4 was a revelation in its compact take every where and not worry about size, image quality, and ease to use. The getting it on the computer, viewing images and sending to family/friends, it just 'works'.
As for my personal more 'art-thought' camera use. One problem I've identified is 'time'. Besides the new digital M-series compared to the film cameras, maybe the biggest change in photography in the past few years in my personal life has been my young sons. One needs TIME to get out and 'do it', and that is one thing I've had less of. Can I fit film into my [changed] time schedule?
dreamsandart
Well-known
Yes, you are right. Its my own personal decision and choice. The reason I asked the question is to get ideals, and think on what others have to say to help with my thoughts about it. Its not a matter of 'what he/she did, so I will too', but sometimes there are ideas that or perspectives that do help. Little did I know a few years ago, life was so much easier deciding which lens/lenses to take out for the day, now have to decide if its film or digital
mrisney
Well-known
If you are shooting 35mm full frame digital : shoot digital
If you are shooting larger than 35mm (120 or sheet film) : shoot film
If you are shooting larger than 35mm (120 or sheet film) : shoot film
paradoxbox
Well-known
why not try getting back in to black and white developing? you don't need a darkroom
i develop my film in my kitchen on the counter and when i was a student i just stored my chemicals in old plastic soda bottles...! i reused a 1.5L bottle of chemicals probably more than 20 or 30 times.
one fantastic reason to keep shooting film (though not so much with the m7) is because many film cameras don't need batteries - it's the main reason i chose a leica M3 over the M6TTL or M7.
it's really a pain in the rear when you want to photograph something but your camera won't take the photo because it doesn't have enough battery power to do the job. too many instances of this really turned me back to film shooting. i love my Nikon D70s DSLR but i have accidentally left it stuck on USB transfer mode one too many times - it drains the battery and the next time i go to use it, 10 shots then it's out of juice. ARGH! I've never had such a problem with one of my manual rangefinders.
besides that fact with film you can change the look of your photos with each roll of film you use, and some film types still offer better DR than digital does.
i develop my film in my kitchen on the counter and when i was a student i just stored my chemicals in old plastic soda bottles...! i reused a 1.5L bottle of chemicals probably more than 20 or 30 times.
one fantastic reason to keep shooting film (though not so much with the m7) is because many film cameras don't need batteries - it's the main reason i chose a leica M3 over the M6TTL or M7.
it's really a pain in the rear when you want to photograph something but your camera won't take the photo because it doesn't have enough battery power to do the job. too many instances of this really turned me back to film shooting. i love my Nikon D70s DSLR but i have accidentally left it stuck on USB transfer mode one too many times - it drains the battery and the next time i go to use it, 10 shots then it's out of juice. ARGH! I've never had such a problem with one of my manual rangefinders.
besides that fact with film you can change the look of your photos with each roll of film you use, and some film types still offer better DR than digital does.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Teuthida
-
The smell of fixer
Murchu
Well-known
I'm no romantic when it comes to film. I have many cameras (and had even more), but the one I enjoy shooting with most of all just happens to be a film camera. Variety is nice, and I shoot both film and digital, but at the end of the day, why not just simply shoot the camera you enjoy most and that gives you the results you need.
John E Earley
Tuol Sleng S21-0174
The above plus:
For situations where there will be great swings in light levels during the day, digital due to easy ISO adjustments.
lacavol
Established
Like some of those above. I use film mainly because all I need is exposure and focus control. There are no batteries to run down when you are days from a power pole. I don't need my reading glasses to operate the camera. I can decide where place my focus. DOF is easy to make very shallow or deep. I can control acutance with my developing. I can take really quick shots with the camera preset in case something materializes.
My digital cameras are relegated to things that are posted on webpages or email.
My digital cameras are relegated to things that are posted on webpages or email.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Quite. There is no such thing as 'the best camera', but quite often, there is 'the best camera for the job'. Only three things stop us using 'the best camera for the job': ignorance, laziness, and inability to afford 'the best camera for the job'. Choose any one, or any combination of the three.
Cheers,
R.
Personally for me, family snap shots are one of THE prime reasons I'm going back to film. I want to pass onto my children their life story in something that is tangible and archival. In 30 years or so, what am I going to do, hand over to my children a dozen hard drives? I am thinking forward on this and I don't see a satisfactory answer.
My parents and grand parents have boxes of negatives and prints. 60 to 70 years old! Where will my family snap shots from digital cameras be in 70 years? Sometimes that's a scary thought. Will there even be jpegs in 50 years?
Film is archival, and I'm moving back to it, for the sake of my children and their children.
Not being able to change ISO in the field, limited (and at the same time forced) to 36 shots, dealing with labs and scratched negatives, spending hours in front of the PC with scanning, dust removal, color correction to achieve half-decent results ... looks like film has become a pain in the rear.
There is no reason why software companies should all conspire to make a certain file format unreadable. Never happened before.
Probably saved forever on servers and backup servers and backup servers or backup servers in the www. Times change.
Of course, if you want to hand over boxes with prints, no one keeps you from having digital pictures printed.
The awesome thing with digital is, even if your home burns down, flickr will be still up and running.
Nermi9
Member
The look and feel of film, however, is NOT a pain in the rear.
doolittle
Well-known
@dreamsandart: you answered your own question in your first post: so you have a film and digital archive and so your M7 doesn't sit on a shelf.
However go with your instincts. If it feels right to shoot with the M9, shoot with the M9. So what if the M7 sits for a while?
I had the opposite dilemma: an M8 which was spending an inordinate amount of time on the shelf. I thought about selling it, but just couldn't do it. I still don't use it so much, but I know I will find myself coming back to it at some stage. It produces nice files which don't require much post-processing. That said I plan to spend some time learning to post-process better and be more efficient with my digital asset management, just not yet!
However go with your instincts. If it feels right to shoot with the M9, shoot with the M9. So what if the M7 sits for a while?
I had the opposite dilemma: an M8 which was spending an inordinate amount of time on the shelf. I thought about selling it, but just couldn't do it. I still don't use it so much, but I know I will find myself coming back to it at some stage. It produces nice files which don't require much post-processing. That said I plan to spend some time learning to post-process better and be more efficient with my digital asset management, just not yet!
I have 190 gigs of photos today. If I bought a Nikon D800, I could double that number faster than the first 190 gigs appeared. How much space will I have to have to store my photos 35 years from now?
kanzlr
Hexaneur
I think it is more a problem of not knowing how to get the best results.
That 36 shots limit will not go away, but the rest?
I use a Coolscan and while I often times have to deal with scratched negatives, ICE does remove that almost perfectly.
Color correction is a breeze if you scan the raw TIFF files without conversion and use ColorNegative in PS to invert the images. It has superb film profiles and I find that for Fuji and Kodak films I do not need to do anything but maybe a slight curves/level adjustment.
Working with scanned negatives is really not more labour intensive than converting camera RAW files.
Chrisrw
photomonkey
Seakayaker1,
Which lab in Seattle is closing in November?
Which lab in Seattle is closing in November?