Do people even know what film is any more?

Yeah, I agree. You can get really good prints from printers, but those quality printers can really cost you big bucks, compared to a normal printer, or "photo printer". Those that cost a around a hundred or two, won't cut it for Pro level work. That's why I send off my scanned negatives to a shop to have them printed.

If you're going to be displaying your work in galleries, I would assume that you are a professional, or can shoot at the Pro level, in that case, I think I'd build a full blown darkroom.

J.:mrgreen:
LOL don't put the cart before the horse my friend!
While building a darkroom does loom in my future, my pressing concern now is archiving about 4 years worth of negatives digitally and selecting pieces to print for my portfolio. These are all B&W and Infrared images. I will be buying a dedicated scanner next week and beginning. I understand your point about printing and I dont have thousands of spare dollars to buy a nice one....right now:p.
Which brought up my questions about printing digitally.
 
I understand your points, but why compare a 6 megapixel digital with medium format film? Heck cheap drugstore 35mm negative film would outperform that particular digital camera.

Not sure what you mean by comparing that camera to medium format film. What do you mean, medium format film? E-6 means E-6 processing. Where is this medium format film thing coming from? I wasn't comparing it to medium format film.

And, funny thing about that particular digital camera--James Russell shot numerous six-figure cosmetics and fashion campaigns using the Fuji S2 pro camera, so your assertion that cheap drugstore negative film outperforms a 6MP digital is quite laughable. He compared the S2's output quite frequently to Fuji's Astia 120 rollfilm...but then, he's only one of Americas' top advertising shooters. I''m sure he'd rather use cheap drugstore film.

Stop by his web site and look at some of the work done with the S2 pro and tell us how bad it looks compared with MF film work. I'd love to hear your dissertation. The Photography and Films Of James Russell and Ann Rutherford Los Angeles New York Dallas Paris

I'm new here so I'm not trying to stir things up with anyone but I have to agree with you re Fuji S2 or any other quality DSLR. Now don't missunderstand .... I love my old OM1 as much as anybody else loves their film but, based on my long experience I can't agree with the "number crunchers" who claim to be able to "prove" that digital can't equal film. The numbers may say so but my eyes tell me how good a print looks and I've seen 16x20's from a 5mp Olympus E1 that blew me away. The owner of that E1 happens to be my wife ... a gallery curator!

I use both digital and 35mm c41 interchangeably and which one I like better is more a matter of the color charachteristic of the medium rather than pixel peeping or numbers (resolution) crunching.

Thankyou
Robert
 
Probably no more than they know what Beta Cams are or remember 8 track tapes.

Hey, film is fabulous. I'm a fan. But 99 percent of clients (I just made that up, but I bet I'm pretty close) don't care about film.

Digital has passed film up in term of clarity and quality. Even though I'm a fan, and offer it myself....no one wants it anymore. Ok, maybe a really select few, but that's about it. If you offer film only, you might really have a huge niche market.

Anyhoo, people, for the most part, have been "pitched" out of film. There are many good reasons for this.

But if you are still shooting film, know and capitalize on that. You are one of the lone rangers out there.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top