bribrius
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2014
- Messages
- 8,709
- Reaction score
- 1,311
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
I dont know? I only shot 35 mm as i grew up as it was the "norm". Wasn't for artistic or proving any point it is just normal. And there were places everywhere to drop off your rolls and order prints. All that seems to have changed. I havent shot film in a couple years now, just not worth the half hour drive to drop them off or sending it out and waiting 2 weeks. If they still had lots of drop off points, i would shoot film more. But that has all been pushed to the wayside and the changes have made shooting film increasing difficult. I know many have darkrooms, labs, but i never wanted that level of investment unless i had too? I was just like every other normal person shooting 35 mm and dropping it off. And then it was pretty inexpensive so you never really gave it much thought.
Digital is way, way, easier and better. You can see the shot right then so you know if you have it or not. With film, you expected one or two shots not to come out. The norm. You just wondered which ones. So digital is a large step up taking the guess work out if it. But it isnt the same nostaligia. Why so many digital programs have editing to make digital "look" like film. Sort of trying to give you the ease of digital but nostalgia of the film look. Still not the same as picking out your film and loading your cameras but it does help.
Also some of the camera companies are making digital cameras to look and feel more like film cameras. So film still had impact on the digital worlds.
I am more interested in the film digital edits now. Shoot digital and pick out the type of film edit i want it too look like. Comparing, i have 6 ? I guess film cameras? Course like old school each having different type/speed film in it. Forgetting to label the backs and slide the cardboard in to remember what film was in which camera. Film, was not and is not easy. But now i can take a photo with my cellphone, edit it to have the look of film amongst 15 choices or more. Without ever worrying about which camera to take and what film is in what camera. Not all film came out good either, some of the stuff (and resulting photos) was pure crap.
Not to say i would totally stop shooting film but to put it in reality..
If you can buy a camera that works and feels like a film camera. If you can edit your photo to a multitude of film "looks". If you dont have to have multiple cameras with multiple types and speed films. Look how much digtal has taken from film to make our life easier. Still most of the perks without the headaches.
The battery argument on digital is kinda dumb, most of the more recent film cameras had batteries too that lasted even less long. But for cameras all manual, consider. When shooting film we were more cautious in what we shot. And took less shots. Maybe at times you might blow through a few rolls in a whack but it was RARE. Most digital cameras are at least good for 200 to 300 shots before the battery is dead. In film terms that is more than what we were shooting anyway in rolls. And you could a extra battery easier than another 5 or 6 rolls. The "i can shoot without a battery going dead" i feel is a very weak argument,
"The range of film" argument. I dont quite get it? I change iso from 200-400- 1200 in digital that IS range. And different speed films and cameras i would have to lug around. Sure, on a single photo maybe you have less range (whites blow out or something). But i have blown out film too (it isnt perfect). But overall the range on digital already surpasses film, you arent carrying various speed films. On the megapixel count, cost benefit film still wins. But as the digital megapixel sensors increase and costs lower on the high megapixel cameras digital will bypass film. And really, how many shoot medium format or 8x10 anyway. I wouldnt mind it. But the idea of a 120 mp digital large sensor dropping in price overtime i find more intriguing.
Digital is way, way, easier and better. You can see the shot right then so you know if you have it or not. With film, you expected one or two shots not to come out. The norm. You just wondered which ones. So digital is a large step up taking the guess work out if it. But it isnt the same nostaligia. Why so many digital programs have editing to make digital "look" like film. Sort of trying to give you the ease of digital but nostalgia of the film look. Still not the same as picking out your film and loading your cameras but it does help.
Also some of the camera companies are making digital cameras to look and feel more like film cameras. So film still had impact on the digital worlds.
I am more interested in the film digital edits now. Shoot digital and pick out the type of film edit i want it too look like. Comparing, i have 6 ? I guess film cameras? Course like old school each having different type/speed film in it. Forgetting to label the backs and slide the cardboard in to remember what film was in which camera. Film, was not and is not easy. But now i can take a photo with my cellphone, edit it to have the look of film amongst 15 choices or more. Without ever worrying about which camera to take and what film is in what camera. Not all film came out good either, some of the stuff (and resulting photos) was pure crap.
Not to say i would totally stop shooting film but to put it in reality..
If you can buy a camera that works and feels like a film camera. If you can edit your photo to a multitude of film "looks". If you dont have to have multiple cameras with multiple types and speed films. Look how much digtal has taken from film to make our life easier. Still most of the perks without the headaches.
The battery argument on digital is kinda dumb, most of the more recent film cameras had batteries too that lasted even less long. But for cameras all manual, consider. When shooting film we were more cautious in what we shot. And took less shots. Maybe at times you might blow through a few rolls in a whack but it was RARE. Most digital cameras are at least good for 200 to 300 shots before the battery is dead. In film terms that is more than what we were shooting anyway in rolls. And you could a extra battery easier than another 5 or 6 rolls. The "i can shoot without a battery going dead" i feel is a very weak argument,
"The range of film" argument. I dont quite get it? I change iso from 200-400- 1200 in digital that IS range. And different speed films and cameras i would have to lug around. Sure, on a single photo maybe you have less range (whites blow out or something). But i have blown out film too (it isnt perfect). But overall the range on digital already surpasses film, you arent carrying various speed films. On the megapixel count, cost benefit film still wins. But as the digital megapixel sensors increase and costs lower on the high megapixel cameras digital will bypass film. And really, how many shoot medium format or 8x10 anyway. I wouldnt mind it. But the idea of a 120 mp digital large sensor dropping in price overtime i find more intriguing.
Last edited:
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/37/37605-90c8efaef5b7d1f52d4bf8e7dfd33673.jpg?1619738148)
