Film VS Digital

[Iron Flatline]

It's just a really long way of saying Film is better than Digital.

The hero posture is getting tiresome. Grow up Battou.

 

[usayit]

lol... yes, I've done it,

That's great. At least you've tried it and understand where some people are coming from. I've met some that look at me strange when I ask about how it prints.

I'll have to take a look at Noiseware Pro. I've been using a combination of NoiseNinja and Lightroom for lighter cleanup. I've had "ok" results but I really haven't put the time into learning how to leverage either. For the most part, I've noticed that it is really the chromatic noise that bothers most people. In that respect, the next best noise reducer is conversion to B&W.

 

[Plato]

I'm fascinated by this conversation. Check these out. Which shots were digital and which ones were on film?

Welcome

 

[JerryPH]

Why would we need to know which is which and why would it make a difference in the end? Any of them could be taken with either, because frankly, they're not that demanding (simple daytime shots on the first page, I don't need to go further).

The biggest advantage film has over digital is dynamic range, and none of those shots came CLOSE to pushing that.

 

[IgsEMT]

film, noise, grain... few weeks ago while bride was fashionably 45mins late for her portraits we were sitting and recalling the good old film days and were wonder when will "a roll of film" become a collector's item.

What does it say about modern photography education?

My friend's younger brother is working on his BA in Film. He said that the way curriculum is designed is first they learn photography and then move on to motion picture. But what's more interesting, is that they aren't allowed to use digital SLRs for any of their classes. Only 35mm SLRs or Hasselblads allowed to be used. Cameras can be signed out from department but film is student's responsibility. They used to have Bronicas but stopped using them when company stopped making them and lost tech support (or something to that degree).

 

[JerryPH]

Universities are traditionally ALWAYS behind technology. Did you know that there is a prominent university teaching students TODAY to build bridges... with rivets? It has been at least 50 years since the last bridge was built that way, yet that is the knowledge that architects are leaving schools and going into working companies with... and then getting their REAL educations.

I value a strong education... but dang, when the info that your universities give you is out dated and incorrect... time get with the times!

I think the same thing for photography. You may get a BA in film photography, but film is a dying art and the vast majority of businesses are either currently digital... or feeling the pinch of getting there ASAP.

Now, motion movie is a different dinosaur that will take longer to die out, but it too will one day fall to the digital evolution. It is inevitable.

 

[Plato]

Why would we need to know which is which and why would it make a difference in the end? Any of them could be taken with either, because frankly, they're not that demanding (simple daytime shots on the first page, I don't need to go further).

The biggest advantage film has over digital is dynamic range, and none of those shots came CLOSE to pushing that.

Please accept my apology for posting photos that do not comply with your standards.

 

[Actor]

Sorry, but I was brought up under the belief "Ignorance is no excuse".

But what exactly needs to be excused? The need for an excuse implies some sort of offense. What is the offense exactly? The fact that he thought the picture was digital? I hardly find that offensive. Given that it's on a computer that's a reasonable assumption. It got digitized somewhere along the way even if originated on analog media.

I'm a film buff so I'm being a devil's advocate. But the writing on the wall is that film is on the way out. I give even odds that you'll not be able to buy film at Wal-Mart in five years. Those who say there's little motivation or need for a novice to learn about film have a point.

By the way, from a purely scientific viewpoint, grain is noise, i.e., a random signal superimposed on desired data.

 

[JerryPH]

Please accept my apology for posting photos that do not comply with your standards.

It has nothing to do with "my standards"... did you not read what I posted?

I will ask again, please tell me how knowing or not knowing which of your basic daylight shots make any kind of contribution to the discussion of differences between film or digital?

If you'd shown film shots something like THIS, THIS or THIS (the last 2 taken from HERE), I would have thought them as pertinent because those shots push the envelope of more than the 5-6 stops that current digital technology permits, they basically blow digital out of the water from that one standpoint... but there is nothing in any of those shots you linked to that display the virtues of film over digital. I'm sorry, but it felt more "self serving" than pertinent to the discussion.

 

[SrBiscuit]

Maybe let people know in your sig that you shoot film? it might clear up some of the confusion, and then you'd get to jump on the people who still comment wrongly about your grain.
i know you shoot film because ive been here awhile and have seen your discussions. new members might not.

*edit*
i agree with jerry in that you cant expect people to know everything.

you gotta offer them the info, and then if they still ignore it, you have a case. as it stands now it seems a bit like you;ve taken a 'high and mighty' stance.

 

[Battou]

Maybe let people know in your sig that you shoot film? it might clear up some of the confusion, and then you'd get to jump on the people who still comment wrongly about your grain.
i know you shoot film because ive been here awhile and have seen your discussions. new members might not.

Well I suppose I could, To but it bluntly, no there are not really many who read the sigs, trust me on this one, PL's statistics would have a lot more hits if people did. the few people who do read them don't bother to click the links leading me to believe they have no intent to comprehent what is actually there. Never the less For the last year or so I have been adding that little text above the photo with the camera and speed information differentiating Film from digital with ASA and ISO using the more reasent ISO for digital....Sadly that has become faulted as I have not even touched my Digital camera in atleast three months if not six. The phrase I shoot Film Expect Grain" has been in my profile for years but that obviously ain't doing shit so...

*edit*

*EDIT*

Removed

 

[SrBiscuit]

battou, if what i said came off as a personal attack, it wasnt meant to. if you read it that way, my apologies.

 

[terri]

I think this thread has gone on long enough, coming dangerously close to crossing the line more than once. Refer to the FAQ's: we'd really prefer folks avoid "digital v. film" discussions as it always comes down to insults over one another's personal preferences. Battou, I know you added a disclaimer at the beginning but we're 3 pages in on this, and your original point has been made. No where to go but down from here, I'm afraid.

Thanks all.