film vs digital

[LaFoto]

I wonder how that can be... there's only this one tiny border between France and Germany and yet you say it is too expensive to photograph on film and have the photos developed and printed. And here I am, often ordering 3 prints of each negative in the first go because then I get each print for only 1 ct! (If I were to reorder, I'd have to pay more, like 5 or 10 ct per print). Like when I photographed the event of my god-son's confirmation, I filled 4 rolls and had them all come back with the prints per picture. I gave my friend 2 of each and kept one to myself, so she can keep hers for the album she's going to make for her son and give away the spare ones to people who are in the respective photo. As simple as that and not expensive at all. I don't understand how the German labs can offer this and the French labs can't?

 

[DarkEyes]

Darkeyes, I have to differ with your assessment that film has no weaknesses. The weaknesses are just different than the weaknesses of digital capture.

Until the camera can see a scene and account for the differences in light, shadow and color temperature the way that the human eye can both mediums will have "weaknesses". Talent or skill comes into play when a photographer is able to overcome those weaknesses or use those weaknesses to express something.

It's like any other choice........there are tradeoffs!

Im sorry deb, but you've miss interpreted what i meant, partlt because of my bad choice in wording. The intention of what i was saying was to say that digital & film do not share all the same weaknessess. I was meaning that digital has some particular weaknessess that films dont have, most notably low dynamic range & pixelisation.

 

[M @ k o]

I voted Film only because that is what I am use too at the time. Don't get me wrong I would love to have one of those pricey digitals. I guess I'm just alittle on the Old school side of the road. I see it this way and I could be wrong, but I've been wrong before so it won't hurt.

When I have family and friends come over and they want to look at my photos, I bring this big huge box of shots out I've taken over the years, some laugh, some cry. But we sit around and flip through them and pass them on, thatz fun to do. With a Digital everything goes on a memory card, so I guess you have to go to the computer to view them or, just view the ones that you printed. Don't get me wrong I would to have one and one day I will, but I do love film and the excitement of getting my film back and see which ones came out best. Hell, I would be happy with just taking shotz with just a disposable. I love it all !!! and I love taking pictures. I just hate the ones that don't come out right.:mrgreen:

M @ k o

 

[Bosscat]

Both film and digital now.

Haven't had enough time to play with the 20D under fire to make any educated reply in regards to which is better.

 

[DocFrankenstein]

I'll do a shoot out anyday with my Speed Graphic vs a MkII 1Ds. If you can't tell the difference, you're blind.

How about picking on someone your own size?

Compare 1Ds to 35mm film
300D to APS film
and Speed Graphics vs same speed graphic with a digital back...

 

[ksmattfish]

How about picking on someone your own size?

Compare 1Ds to 35mm film
300D to APS film
and Speed Graphics vs same speed graphic with a digital back...

Hey now, the direct quote was "...you are not able to tell the difference between an 11"x17" print of a 20d and any film camera out there". Had it been 20d vs. 35mm I wouldn't have said a thing.