Would you go back in time???

[Ysarex]

OMG Joe you are a grumpy individual! lol

We are talking about "soul" not end result. Difference.
I have not contradicted myself, I have tried to explain the same thing in a number of different ways.
I have told you my digital images are better than my film. Yes, you can achieve better results with digital, I have said that!
The personal reward for successful images is not the same for digital as it is for film.

Ridiculous. All this time I thought I was equally gratified to achieve a successful image from either medium. You have a problem imposing your strange notions on others.

The process to take the best picture possible in a given situation using each medium is often different. It's easier with digital so personal satisfaction is less.

Ridiculous again. Just because digital is more capable than film doesn't make it less difficult. And regardless of difficulty that's only your weird rule that personal satisfaction is less for one than the other. I don't share your neurosis and I'm equally satisfied with either.

I am not referencing which tools are better. I'm referencing how each tool is used to lead to an end result.

Henry you said is headed for fashion, that's not the industry I made reference too!

Everything else I have said stands.

You said this: "The wedding and portrait industry today for example is virtually extinct from a professional aspect. Everyone is a wedding and portrait pro.... Wedding and portrait photographers sell to people who sometimes can't work out which is the front of a camera and which is the back. The abundance of these photographers has priced most real pros out of the market and completely changed the industry over the past one to 2 decades to the point where there is no longer an industry." As I said, I suspect that list of pro wedding/portrait photographers I supplied above would have some very unkind words for you.

Of course there are still real pros out there to some degree but they are diminishing and have been for 2 decades now. The profits in the industry are less as amateurs flood the market and drive pricing down. We now also have post time involved which also chews into a photographers time and profits which wasn't a concern back in the film days.

Film photographers didn't have post time? What'd you do shoot everything on Polaroid?

Finally, YES, damn well I can tell where many images are not straight out of a camera, where there would've been problems and how the photographer went about dealing with those problems. If you think this is not possible you simply lack the necessary experience.

Where is this coming from? So what? You don't have some kind of SOOC neurosis going on here too. Who cares if the image is SOOC or not? What's that got to do with this?

Joe

 

[limr]

@Ysarex and @F5 Penguin

Let it go or take it to PM. Otherwise, thread gets closed.

It was an interesting question to get people talking about what works for them personally, but as mentioned, it is a conversation that we know can turn on a dime, so if we can avoid further grandstanding (from anyone!), that would be great. If not, then the lock goes on.

 

[ac12]

The principle of unintended outcomes would come into play and many things would change that you might not realise were connected to digital photography.
.

Awww, don't burst my bubble

 

[Derrel]

OMG Joe you are a grumpy individual! lol


The personal reward for successful images is not the same for digital as it is for film. The process to take the best picture possible in a given situation using each medium is often different. It's easier with digital so personal satisfaction is less..

Pure fertilizer. Put it in bags and sell it.

I shot film from 1975 to 2000. I've shot (almost) exclusively digital since February, 2001. The degree of "satisfaction" I derive from a photo has NOTHING to do with the ease with which the image was made. There's a hell of a lot more to "satisfaction" in creating an image, in creating a photograph, than just stuffing the camera with a roll of Ektachrome or Tri-X.

Again....trolling and film versus digital topics are really not supposed to be done on TPF, and you sir, F5 Penguin (your profile shot is the Nikon F5, a famous Nikon film camera...) STARTED your membership here with a one-and-the-same troll thread AND a film vs digital thread, advocating strongly, and with much effort, in-favor of film.

 

[ac12]

First, I'm no troll. Yes, topic digital v film done to death and maybe this is how the thread has been taken as people tend to become "troll thread ready."
I am not looking at which of the two is better. I am looking at the affect each has had on the bigger picture, photography itself, the bettering of it and the emotional reward of each medium. Forward progression is not always for the better in every way.

Maybe you rattle off better pictures today than you did in the past with film. Maybe digital has a billion benefits over film for you. People very well may be taking better images than they did with film. My question is, did digital make you a better "photographer" or simply give you better pics? There is a difference.

I believe film did that for us.

In looking at your responses to various posts, you sure sound like you are trolling and stirring up a pot.
This film vs. digital debate has been hashed to death for many years.
If you want to believe in film, go right ahead but don't knock the guys who prefer digital.

Good day.

 

[F5 Penguin]

No point responding to anything, thread will get locked and everyone has had their say. Made my points clear enough.

As for me being a film buff, soon as I get my adapter to run Photo Secretary and offload the shooting data from my F5 I'll be able to tell you the last time I shot anything on film.
As for why the avatar and F5 in the screen name, I tried to use Penguin, already taken. I haven't been on a forum in 15 years so decided may as well use the camera I was using back when I was active on forums for old times sake and add it to Penguin rather than stick some random number or something after Penguin.

Trolls are one post wonders too, you realize this? This troll has been out and about and helping a few members here as well.

 

[limr]

Folks, calling someone a troll is also stirring the pot. Unless you want to answer the question in the OP, just leave it alone.

 

[Fred von den Berg]

No, I wouldn't go back. That film is still being used is nice from my personal point of view, and it's interesting to see start up projects popping up here and there which are dedicated to keeping things moving (I posted a link to an article in a British newspaper about such a project a day or two ago), but digital is far too interesting and empowering to simply abandon. That said, I'm big on nostalgia and am currently considering the purchase of a 30D to complement my 10D.

 

[F5 Penguin]

Just for the record, I'd blow up cell phones and social media as well.

 

[zombiesniper]

I always find questions like these fascinating.
Why wouldn't someone just not use/do the thing that that is disliked instead of forcing these ideas of whats right on everyone else? I find that a lot of western society has become a they shouldn't have it if I can't/don't want it. Instead we really should take on a more inclusive approach. If it doesn't negatively impact anyone else, who cares if he/she/they have/do a thing?

 

[F5 Penguin]

It's a hypothetical. Maybe if people were less serious and angry the world would be a better place? Another hypothetical?
No one can change the world by posting in this thread. You can get angry over nothing here or you can have some fun with it.
I've come to the wrong place.

 

[compur]

Welcome to Maple Street ...

 

[vintagesnaps]

That's a good episode!

So are we hopping in the DeLorean or what?

 

[waday]

So are we hopping in the DeLorean or what?

Wait, first we need 1.21 gigawatts. Do we have any thunderstorms converging on clock towers?

 

[vintagesnaps]

We'll all have to meet at the Twin Pines mall. Somebody bring plutonium. And beer.