Things I noticed shooting film vs digital

[480sparky]

Taken as a personal statement,.........

That's exactly what they are. Only put an 's' at the end of the word 'statement'.

 

[timor]

O'lala !
Requesting permission to reproduce this list on other websites. Especially those digital. LOL.
The only thing I am not sure about is the cost...

Permission granted.

As for cost, just sit down and compare a modern consumer-grade DSLR and 2-3 current lenses to a used 20-y.o. top-end film body & legacy glass.

Providing, that I am actually wet printing cost of good quality FB paper (and mistakes made with it) is quite high:
Black White B H Photo Video

 

[bribrius]

[/QUOTE]
Providing, that I am actually wet printing cost of good quality FB paper (and mistakes made with it) is quite high:
Black White B H Photo Video[/QUOTE] i actually think digital is far, far cheaper. Mistakes don't cost as much and most don't even get printed. Only way i can think of that digital would cost more is if you printed every single time you hit the shutter. which no one will ever do.

 

[limr]

If you're not wet printing, though, the costs go way down.

It would be interesting to really crunch numbers on this, actually. I'd figure only a minimal comparison would be feasible and it might be more instructive to change the question to something like "How many rolls of film could you shoot for the price of a DSLR + lenses?"

Things to consider: cost of film gear, cost of film (bulk vs pre-rolled), developing, cost of scanner or darkroom supplies...all vs cost of digital body (DSLR or mirrorless? entry level? mid-range? full-frame?) and lenses (just kit? different primes? zooms? SD cards?)

 

[480sparky]

Most folks forget (or totally ignore) the cost of cameras, lenses, computers, printers, ink, paper, SD cards, cords & cables, hard drives, software etc. when figuring cost of digital.

For the same $2k someone spends on one DSLR, they could buy a top-end legacy SLR, a passel of cult primes and a complete darkroom.

 

[bribrius]

If you're not wet printing, though, the costs go way down.

It would be interesting to really crunch numbers on this, actually. I'd figure only a minimal comparison would be feasible and it might be more instructive to change the question to something like "How many rolls of film could you shoot for the price of a DSLR + lenses?"

Things to consider: cost of film gear, cost of film (bulk vs pre-rolled), developing, cost of scanner or darkroom supplies...all vs cost of digital body (DSLR or mirrorless? entry level? mid-range? full-frame?) and lenses (just kit? different primes? zooms? SD cards?)

well get going. i am waiting intently.

 

[limr]

Most folks forget (or totally ignore) the cost of cameras, lenses, computers, printers, ink, paper, SD cards, cords & cables, hard drives, software etc. when figuring cost of digital.

For the same $2k someone spends on one DSLR, they could buy a top-end SLR, a passel of primes and a complete darkroom.

Oh I agree. And the money someone spends on upgrading a lens could buy me a LOT of film and developing supplies.

 

[limr]

If you're not wet printing, though, the costs go way down.

It would be interesting to really crunch numbers on this, actually. I'd figure only a minimal comparison would be feasible and it might be more instructive to change the question to something like "How many rolls of film could you shoot for the price of a DSLR + lenses?"

Things to consider: cost of film gear, cost of film (bulk vs pre-rolled), developing, cost of scanner or darkroom supplies...all vs cost of digital body (DSLR or mirrorless? entry level? mid-range? full-frame?) and lenses (just kit? different primes? zooms? SD cards?)

well get going. i am waiting intently.

Dude. Linguist. Writing teacher. I don't do number crunching.

Let me be more precise: it would be interesting for someone else to really crunch numbers on this.

 

[photoguy99]

Costs on both sides depend a great deal on what you're doing. Are you running a high end printer with a monochrome ink set to produce fine b&w prints on crazily expensive papers? Are you doing the same, but printing on to transparencies and pulling platinum prints? Are you shooting Leica with exotic lenses, and printing on to hand-coated wall-sized linen?

There's lots of ways to spend and save money on both sides.

It's cheaper -- for sparky -- and that's cool. Good on ya!

Me, I don't count too much. I also don't buy gear hardly ever, so, mostly the costs stay below the radar.

 

[Fred Berg]

Another cost consideration is the longevity of the equipment. My SLR cameras are quite old (models from the 90's, 70's and 60's) but they just keep on going. What digital camera bought today will still be in use in fifty, forty or even twenty years' time?

 

[timor]

cost more is if you printed every single time you hit the shutter. which no one will ever do.

Neither do I, I don't print every single frame I ever shot. LOL. But then I personally do not see much of a sens of shooting film without some outcome in the form of nice FB or even RC print. The whole point is to be different from the digital mainstream, to have image in the form of real photograph, not inkjet imitation of a photograph.

 

[gsgary]

O'lala !
Requesting permission to reproduce this list on other websites. Especially those digital. LOL.
The only thing I am not sure about is the cost...

Permission granted.

As for cost, just sit down and compare a modern consumer-grade DSLR and 2-3 current lenses to a used 20-y.o. top-end film body & legacy glass.

All depends which cameras your talking about, mine will not go down in value but cost more than a lot of digital

 

[Matthew Freed]

I've been shooting DSLR cameras for about 7 years and I just made the leap to a Hasselblad 503CW medium format film camera. I'm so excited about being more meticulous about the shots and to learn the film process. So, to each their own.

 

[Vtec44]

To each their own. I shoot both, digital and film

 

[The_Traveler]

I used a Hassy years ago before time and chemical sensitivity made darkroom work unpleasant.

This review from B&H pretty much stated how I felt about it at the time (although I was far from a great photographer)

.......... They allow me to literally create hand crafted photographs, controlling almost every aspect of what I am given to work with. My "work-flow" is beautifully slow and wonderfully full of time consuming details. Production isn't on a schedule for completion. Rather, I work for the satisfaction of the creative process. The camera body is totally reliable, extremely strong, easy to use, and accommodates the finest quality lenses in the world. It is a camera system that demands concentration, effort, and dedication. It rarely fails to disappoint me.