Digital v's film

sixty6 · Jul 22, 2008

Hi all,
If this post has been covered before, please excuse me and direct me to it. I'm after the pros and cons of digital pictures versus film pictures. I'm looking to buy an SLR and am not sure what direction to go in. Also, if this post belongs in another section, feel free to direct me.
Thanks.

Battou · Jul 22, 2008

http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=116876

Budget information is useful too

Village Idiot · Jul 22, 2008

After the initial purchase, digital will be cheaper and more effective for a beginner. While the quality may not be the same, not having a dark room and having to go to Wal Mart to have them develop the film without having the ability to do any processing to it can be a pain. But hey, if you have the room and supplies for a darkroom, but a cheap Mamiya MF camera and some lenses and go have some fun.

Zansho · Jul 22, 2008

>.>; Digital is already catching up (and in some cases) surpassing film in quality. Digital has much better ISO performance noise wise, instant gratification, no "developing costs," among other things.

The only reason why I'd use film is for a 4x5 negative (large format camera) and maybe medium format negative and scan those. My 5D can beat output from any 35mm SLR camera any day of the week.

Only way I'd consider film is large format. That's pretty much it.

Robin · Jul 22, 2008

I agree, since I've gone digital I would only ever use film if I was pulling out my 4x5. I also agree that without the use of a dark room, you would have more control over post processing with digital than film.

Alpha · Jul 22, 2008

In medium format film there's little comparison quality wise for the vast majority of digital cameras. Perhaps not a fair fight, but for example at my last shoot, I was shooting 645 film and another photographer was shooting with a D200. His RAW files at the same magnification look pretty awful compared to my negative scans.

sabbath999 · Jul 22, 2008

Alpha said:
In medium format film there's little comparison quality wise for the vast majority of digital cameras. Perhaps not a fair fight, but for example at my last shoot, I was shooting 645 film and another photographer was shooting with a D200. His RAW files at the same magnification look pretty awful compared to my negative scans.

I don't doubt you are right when looking at the scans in high magnification... but that doesn't necessarily translate into a lot better print quality unless you go BIG.

Absolutely, medium format with big scans will beat a D200 hands down when looking at each 100 percent. But... in the terms of real world prints, the difference is pretty hard to spot.

Alpha · Jul 22, 2008

Well lucky for me I go big. And As far as I'm concerned there are times when the difference is visible in a 9x12. Think of it this way. Every step up in sensor/negative size gets a little closer to a contact print. Even in a smaller print, if I can see the difference btw 35mm and MF, I can certainly see it between APS-C and MF.

icassell · Jul 22, 2008

I gave away all my 35mm stuff recently because I just wasn't using it. Hours hidden away in a darkroom to get the print I wanted was very antisocial -- at least I can do PS in my living room and, frankly, it is alot less expensive to experiment and make mistakes. The instant gratification of the digital format also makes for a quicker learning curve (see what you did wrong and try it the right way -- rather than waiting for images to come back and then trying to figure out how to correct what you were doing wrong).

I'm not disparaging those who still do and love film, but if I were to choose only one or the other (which I did), I'd go digital every time.

Alpha · Jul 22, 2008

You might also consider what a nightmare it can be to properly back up and secure your digital images, especially after you've been shooting for a while. Further, you have long-term storage media and compatibility to consider. Whereas with film, you just need some negative pages and binders.

randerson07 · Jul 22, 2008

I find it to be personal preference, Yeah todays high end DSLR's produce some super sharp images at really high ISOs with little to no noise. But film has a look and feel all its own.

If your looking to take good pictures get a DSLR, if you want high ISO performace and ease of use get a DSLR, if your looking for quick turnaround and instant gratification get a DSLR, and so on

If you want to really enjoy photography and take your time setting up shots(you only get about 36 shots a roll, not 100's per memory card), and you think you might one day like to develop your own or do wet prints or shoot medium and large format, or you just want to be different, then go film.

Film and Digital are different forms to achieve a common goal, they each have a look and feel all their own. You really have to experience each of them to really get an understanding and decide which you prefer.

Personally im on a film kick, just started developing and scanning my own Black and Whites, I have a slide projector and also shoot slide film. Its really rekindled photography as a hobby for me, without finding film(I never in my life used a film camera before March of this year unless you count disposables) I probably wouldnt still be into photography.

Joves · Jul 22, 2008

The other thing I love about Dslrs is you are not stuck in one ISO, when you are out shooting. With film one you load a roll you are stuck till you shoot the whole roll.

prodigy2k7 · Jul 22, 2008

Alpha said:
You might also consider what a nightmare it can be to properly back up and secure your digital images, especially after you've been shooting for a while. Further, you have long-term storage media and compatibility to consider. Whereas with film, you just need some negative pages and binders.

I have no problem with backing up images. The camera software transfers the images to my computer in folders of dates and then if I want to back them up onto a CD i can do that. I can also but external hard drive to use and store all my images on there if I wanted to.

prodigy2k7 · Jul 22, 2008

randerson07 said:
If you want to really enjoy photography and take your time setting up shots(you only get about 36 shots a roll, not 100's per memory card), and you think you might one day like to develop your own or do wet prints or shoot medium and large format, or you just want to be different, then go film.

People who are digital and are good at what they do, do take their time to set up shots. We also DO enjoy photography. You make it sound like people with digital do not enjoy photography?