Would you sell your digital gear?

[PhotoWrangler]

Just what the title says.... As a film shooter, would you ever consider selling your digital gear and go back to 100% film?

Why or why not?

 

[Danmunro_nz]

I have given it serious consideration. I own Canon EOS digital and 35mm bodies and a number of lenses. I use the 35mm more that the digital. But I do like the convenience that digital offers. Its also handy if money is tight and I cannot afford to process lots of film.

 

[Derrel]

Buy film, take it home. Shoot film. Take it to the lab. Drive home. Wait a day or two. Drive back to the lab. Pay for sub-par processing. Drive home. Laboriously cull thru tiny pieces of film using Schneider 10x magnifying loupe. Drtive back to lab to take in film or slides for enlargements. Drive home. Drive back to lab to pay and pick up not-quite-what-I-expected enlargements. Drive home.

Oh...want to shoot a LOT of color pictures??? How about paying a MONTH"S RENT for a 20-roll pack of Kodachrome 64 Professional, and then half a month's rent for processing...for a measly 720 frames (20-roll brick of 36-exposure rolls in a "brick" of Kodachrome).

Film? No thanks. Wayyy too expensive per frame, scratches, dust, storage headaches, sorting nightmares, contact proofing hassles, delays, lost negatives, dusty negs and slides, hassles galore.

 

[pixmedic]

Buy film, take it home. Shoot film. Take it to the lab. Drive home. Wait a day or two. Drive back to the lab. Pay for sub-par processing. Drive home. Laboriously cull thru tiny pieces of film using Schneider 10x magnifying loupe. Drtive back to lab to take in film or slides for enlargements. Drive home. Drive back to lab to pay and pick up not-quite-what-I-expected enlargements. Drive home.

Oh...want to shoot a LOT of color pictures??? How about paying a MONTH"S RENT for a 20-roll pack of Kodachrome 64 Professional, and then half a month's rent for processing...for a measly 720 frames (2o-roll brick of 36-exposure shots in a "brick" of Kodachrome).

Film? No thanks.

I don't shoot much film but...would this scenario change any if you did your own developing?

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Christopher, I thought you gave up film for Instagram?

 

[PhotoWrangler]

I don't shoot much film but...would this scenario change any if you did your own developing?

Yes. UPS delivers film at my doorstep, and I develop it in my bathroom. The only reason I have to drive any where is to shoot something. And with Tetenol now being sold in the US again, its just as easy to process color as it is B&W.

 

[PhotoWrangler]

Christopher, I thought you gave up film for Instagram?

I guess you were on FB yesterday. LOL!

 

[compur]

I still use digital for quick and easy illustration photos such as for selling merchandise online but I doubt I would ever hang a digital photo on my wall. They are just too ordinary.

 

[PhotoWrangler]

I still use digital for quick and easy illustration photos such as for selling merchandise online but I doubt I would ever hang a digital photo on my wall. They are just too ordinary.

The more fixer I mix, and the more sheets of negatives that I add to my collection, the more I fall in love with film again. I've used my D7000 less than 5 times since I purchased it a few months ago. If I pick up a camera its usually been my F100, and last week it was the Hasselblad. I just got a 4x5 Speed Graphic in so I'm going to start dabbling in large format I hope.

I don't want a film vs digital debate to come out of this thread, but for me personally, I've enjoyed learning film again way more than I ever enjoyed learning digital. So much so that I've recently contemplated selling my digital gear completely. If I'm not using it, there's no sense in it just sitting there depreciating in value at such a rapid pace. I can use a P&S if I just want to document personal things, and if I ever do decide to go back into business, I can buy new bodies then.

 

[unpopular]

No. I don't think so. While there are lots of things I'd like to do with film that I never had the chance, the ongoing expense is just too high. I am also not sure that anything I do is going to be too significant.

There's a lot of work to be done in digital. Many photographers don't realize it. But dichromated colloids and other polymers? Maybe 50-100 years ago it'd be interesting, but any more - it just seems like a waste of time.

 

[PhotoWrangler]

No. I don't think so. While there are lots of things I'd like to do with film that I never had the chance, the ongoing expense is just too high.

I can see your point - film, paper, chemicals, etc...

But how is that any different than buying a $1500 body now... and then buying another $1500 body in 2 or 3 years when the latest and greatest is 17mpx more than your old body? Or spending $600 now for LR4, and then another $600 in a year when LR5 comes out? Digital is not without its ongoing expenses...

 

[unpopular]

^^ I don't think we're in that trap any longer. Digital cameras today have a much longer lifespan, and small format (35mm included) is quickly reaching it's physical limitations - just as small format film had. There are improvements, but they're pretty modest or specialized. I have to ask myself if I could shoot with a $1500 body then, why can't I shoot with the same camera now - hasn't all that has changed is the price tag? You don't have to upgrade, you know.

As for software ... f*ck Adobe.

 

[Patrice]

There is absolutely no need to have the latest and greatest digital body, arguing that is pointless. This is no different than if your F4 is doing everything you ask of it then there is no need to get an F6 just because it's newer and has better technology.

Even with film, unless you only display prints enlarged from negatives, then you are scanning and doing some digital processing.

I use film, I develop B&W film and colour positives, I also use digital cameras, and print from scanned negatives and slides. Digital is just another way of doing photography and it definitely has some advantages.

 

[Tony S]

Never..... haven't used film since 2001 and would never look back to it.

 

[PhotoWrangler]

I have to ask myself if I could shoot with a $1500 then, why can't I shoot with the same camera now - hasn't all that has changed is the price tag? You don't have to upgrade, you know.

I'd agree with you... but unfortunately I'm sure the majority wouldn't

As for software ... f*ck Adobe.

*Snort*

I felt the same way every time a new LR4 or CS5 comes out... or are we up to CS6 now?