Digital vs. Traditional....Please offer your opinions

Discussion in 'Beyond the Basics' started by jasonasmith, Sep 6, 2004.

?

Which is more useful to the general public?

  1. Traditional Photography

    35.0%
  2. Digital Photography

    65.0%
  1. jasonasmith

    jasonasmith TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello, I am currently a student of photography who uses both traditional and digital methods. I am conducting a small survey for a school research project. Any help with the following questions would be great. I am looking for simple responses so I can get a general idea of peoples opinions on traditional vs. digital methods. Thanks for your help.

    -Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your professional needs?

    -Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your personal needs?

    -What do you feel is the public opinion regarding using digital over traditional methods?

    -In your opinion is digital photography truly more cost affective than traditional photography in the long run?

    -What major issues remain to solved involving digital photography?

    -How soon will high quality digital cameras reach consumer friendly prices? Do most consumers really need a higher quality digital camera?

    -What is your stance on the dialogue of the future of traditional vs. digital methods?


    Any sort of response is welcome. Again, thank you so much.

    Sincerely,
    Jason A. Smith
     
  2. LizM

    LizM TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Messages:
    823
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Heart of the Heart of Dixie
    -Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your professional needs? Digital

    -Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your personal needs? Digital

    -What do you feel is the public opinion regarding using digital over traditional methods? Fear of technology

    -In your opinion is digital photography truly more cost affective than traditional photography in the long run? Depends on the amount of shots you take and what quality you need. The more photos you take the more cost effective it becomes.

    -What major issues remain to solved involving digital photography? Storage and focus

    -How soon will high quality digital cameras reach consumer friendly prices? Next year. Do most consumers really need a higher quality digital camera? Need? Maybe. Want? Definately!

    -What is your stance on the dialogue of the future of traditional vs. digital methods? Both have a valid place in photography. Simply a matter of personal choice.


    Good luck with your class!
     
  3. santino

    santino TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,240
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Austria, heart in Poland -->
    nice question but I think nobody can answer it properly. simply use both ;)
     
  4. ksmattfish

    ksmattfish Now 100% DC - not as cool as I once was, but still

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2003
    Messages:
    7,021
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Obviously film has been more useful in the past century, and in the future digital will be more useful. Right now we are in a transitionary period.

    I use traditional film photography for both. I love the look of a hand printed photograph from a big piece of film.

    I think people perceive it as being more convenient and cheaper. I agree that it is more convenient.

    I think that the image quality of most digi point-n-shoots is already good enough for most folks, and the prices aren't too bad.

    No. When looking at it over a single year it may seem cheaper, but equipment (camera, computer, printer, etc...) upgrades and professional printing services over a lifetime of photography is going to make both film and digital cost about the same: a lot!!!

    For me I want to see a DSLR with a sensor as good as the Canon 1Ds for under $500, and it needs to have at least the dynamic range of slide film. Even so that wouldn't replace any of my medium and large format film equipment. Eventually I'll want a DSLR that has the resolution of 4x5 sheet film and the dynamic range of BW neg film. :D Insuring the stability and safety of digital files is also an issue that is starting to be dealt with (in many fields besides photography).

    I get tired of the attitude that a photographer has to pick one or the other. Even when I get my fantasy DSLR (described above), I'll still be shooting film and printing in my darkroom; I like it. I feel that continuing to study both only strengthens my skills and versatility.
     
  5. BrettG

    BrettG TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    -Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your professional needs?
    I'm not a professional, can't answer that one

    -Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your personal needs?
    Depends on the situation. If I'd like to take pictures of something, but I'm not too concerned with quality of pictures, I'd use my digital. If I'm looking to get some cool shots though, I'd use my film.

    -What do you feel is the public opinion regarding using digital over traditional methods?
    I think most people, people who aren't serious into photography, would definitely prefer digital. Digital is all about convenience, not quality (unless you spend a lot of money on your digital). People don't have to spend so much money developing film.

    -In your opinion is digital photography truly more cost affective than traditional photography in the long run?
    I'm not really experienced enough to give a good answer, but I'd say it's a little balanced. When I took my trip to Alaska, I took 14 rolls of film, and the developing costed about $150 (with a picture CD). That's expensive, but then again to get a digital camera with similar quality to my film camera I'd have to spend at least 3x as much. With higher quality digitals, the size of the pictures will be bigger, so you'll need a big memory card which can run you about $150. You still do have to print your pictures out (unless you're content with letting them sit on your hard drive). I guess if you take a LOT of pictures, digital is definitely more cost efficient, but if you're like me and not sure how serious you are about photography yet, film is the way to go.

    -What major issues remain to solved involving digital photography?
    From what I understand, you can't get very big enlargements with digitals, unless you spend a LOT of money. Even my dad's $180 point and shoot camera got pretty good enlargements. I'm not sure of the size, it's at least 20 inches wide by maybe 8 inches tall (it's a panoramic shot)

    -How soon will high quality digital cameras reach consumer friendly prices? Do most consumers really need a higher quality digital camera?
    If by consumers you mean parents that just want pictures of their kids birthday parties, I'd say no they don't need it. I'm hoping that within five years really good quality digital cameras will fall in price drastically. My digital camera is I believe 2 megapixels, I spent about $230 on it when I got it. I can get over 3 megapixels for the same price now I bet.

    -What is your stance on the dialogue of the future of traditional vs. digital methods?
    I'm not sure what you're asking here.




    I just got into photography recently, and at first I was convinced I wanted a digital for conveniences sake. Quality, however, does matter to me, and I'm not rich so I can't go out and spend $1000 on a great digital camera for a hobby that I'm not even sure if I'll really get into. My film costed me $250 (that's with a lens, and it was a crappy lens which I'm replacing now), and it gives me pretty decent quality pictures. I'm very satisfied with the camera itself (though not the lens). It'll be a few years yet before a digital camera with acceptable quality will be in my personal price range, I think.
     
  6. Alison

    Alison Swiss Army Friend Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2004
    Messages:
    9,469
    Likes Received:
    96
    Location:
    TX
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
     
  7. Bosscat

    Bosscat TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ontario Canada
    -Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your professional needs?....Film

    -Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your personal needs?....Film

    -What do you feel is the public opinion regarding using digital over traditional methods?....Makes them think they are great photographers

    -In your opinion is digital photography truly more cost affective than traditional photography in the long run?...No,,,digital cameras are Future Trash

    -What major issues remain to solved involving digital photography?...Resolution

    -How soon will high quality digital cameras reach consumer friendly prices? Do most consumers really need a higher quality digital camera?....We are years away from digital coming close to equaling film

    -What is your stance on the dialogue of the future of traditional vs. digital methods?.....Long live Kodachrome 64
     
  8. Varthlokkur

    Varthlokkur TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    129
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Hampshire

    I agree with most all of what Alison said. With a few additions.


    When I was selling cameras I hardly every sold a film camera to the general public. We sold some film slr's to students and those that wanted interchangable lenses but couldnt afford the digital slrs. The general public wants digital and they want it bad. It has been wonderfull for the industry.




    Stopping the magnification factor on digital slr's, getting a wider latitude range on the same slr's






    They are already there. Anything 3MP and above will meet 95% of the consumer needs.

    No, they dont need them. They just want them. Bigger, better, stronger, faster. Thats what sells today for any product.




    Film is dead except for artists and traditionalists. everyone else has moved to digital.
     
  9. mrsid99

    mrsid99 TPF Supporters Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    2,964
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Florida
     
  10. Scurra

    Scurra TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,159
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    Kent UK
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I agree with Santino, Use both, digital is really useful if you want to have your images posted on an electronic medium such as the internet or in electronically published documents.

    However film gives you something tangible at the end of the process, Digital can be printed out but it's extra hassle and cost that many consumer digital users aren't fussed about when they can display their slideshow on a PC.

    I personally like getting my prints back from the lab and being able to flick through them and have something real. It gives a better sense of achievement in my opinion. Digital photography is going to bring an age of disposable images, you take a shot, view it instantly and can ditch it and try again, whereas with film you have to make sure that you have everything set up to produce the result you want because you have a limited number of shots at the subject.

    Just a thought.
     
  11. green

    green TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2004
    Messages:
    135
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your professional needs?

    depends on the situation. for paying gigs i prefer digital, partially because of the cameras i have... canon AE1 vs Canon 10D... the 10D has a better final quality, bigger enlargement size etc... also, same as alison, theres less stress in digital because you KNOW that they turned out fine before you leave. (plus it works out cheaper... less cost more profit). i love film because its the roots of photography... allows for mystery and suprise... some of my favourite pictures are ones that suprised me when i got them back from the lab.


    Do you prefer traditional photography or digital photography for your personal needs?

    same as above... kind of. it all depends on the situation... sometimes i prefer the ease of digital and the "editability" since i'm not great in the darkroom... and other times i like the simplicity of film.


    What do you feel is the public opinion regarding using digital over traditional methods?

    i think a lot of the time digital photographers get a lot of flack because they're not doing photography the "real way"... which is sad... its just another medium for the same thing...


    In your opinion is digital photography truly more cost effective than traditional photography in the long run?

    (sorry about the edit... its one of my pet peeves) definitely. my costs went down by half for weddings and portrait shoots. plus, you can preview your pictures and print only the best. I went out yesterday to take engagement pictures of my brother and his fiance... took 180 pictures. if i used film, i would be printing them all... approx 8 films? so about $65... with digital... i will likely print 10... whats the point in printing anything less than stellar and having them collect dust in an album... so... $2.50? the rest i will store on cd and if i want more later, i can print them.

    What major issues remain to solved involving digital photography?

    as a personal thing... i'd like to see a split crystal focus on canon EOS's but thats a problem with the film version and the digital. manual focus is never as sharp without it.

    also storage... i worry about the quality of cds in 10-15 years... whether they will disintigrate will all my pictures.

    How soon will high quality digital cameras reach consumer friendly prices? Do most consumers really need a higher quality digital camera?

    define "consumer friendly" and define what kind of camera. I think for the average consumer... (remember that according to statistics the average person takes approximately 25 pictures per year) there are many cameras out there to suit needs at good prices. most people only really enlarge to a MAXIMUM of 8x10, but the average consumer rarely does that anyway. so a 3-5Mp camera is fine for them and can be purchased at pretty reasonable prices.


    What is your stance on the dialogue of the future of traditional vs. digital methods?

    I agree with ksmattfish on this one. hehehe... my husband has a vw club... (as a strange parallel) and we have the same argument... which is better... air-cooled cars (old bugs, buses) or water-cooled (golf, jettas)... some people are purists to one or the other but the majority of people have at least one of both kinds... and yet, theres still some weird segregation. its all photography... capturing of light... whether i put it on film or a memory card its going to end up in an album or on my wall.
     
  12. johnlo

    johnlo TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New York
    sorry, i'm old school. Film is still much better. more fun to photograph. But I do have digital camera that I use for work..... faster result for the client. Time is money... and I need money.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

traditional vs. digital photography