Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 6/19/2017 5:11:09 AM EDT
Digital looks like plastic shit to me after comparing side by side with film images.









Link Posted: 6/19/2017 5:13:02 AM EDT






Link Posted: 6/19/2017 5:42:58 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 6:03:44 AM EDT
3-5 year product cycles , awful plastic look, editing files like a sucker, worrying about memory cards. batteries. no thanks, you can keep this digital garbage
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 6:19:00 AM EDT
        >          
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 6:31:31 AM EDT
I'll stick with my 'digital garbage' considering that I need wildly differing ISOs within minutes of each other at high frame rates and volumes.  Took over 3000 this weekend alone.  That would be a fuckton of film. 

Link Posted: 6/19/2017 7:54:33 AM EDT
I make my living with cameras. If I had to do it with film I would rather go dig ditches.
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 2:07:25 PM EDT
No way bra, digital rocks.

Yea though you will need to learn how to deal with less dynamic range, and how to allocate your pixels.

But, the color and precision of digital rocks.

For best results try a Sony a7, a7r or a7sii


Nothing like a high dynamic range full frame digital with a f1.8 or wider lense

A 85 f1.2 on the a7r would rock your world
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 4:12:01 PM EDT
I shoot digital, 35mm and 120 film.

For fun/creativity I love film, but when it comes to professional work digital is a god send. They both have their roles, and digital will never look like film does...whether you like that look is personal preference.
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 4:59:51 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Gentleman4561:
I shoot digital, 35mm and 120 film.

For fun/creativity I love film, but when it comes to professional work digital is a god send. They both have their roles, and digital will never look like film does...whether you like that look is personal preference.
View Quote
They make 120 film?!!?

The microcontrast must be amazing
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 5:05:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/19/2017 5:05:59 PM EDT by NorthPolar]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RealFitness86:


They make 120 film?!!?

The microcontrast must be amazing
View Quote
120 and 220 are the only (that I know of) somewhat easily available medium format film sizes these days. 
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 5:15:09 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NorthPolar:

120 and 220 are the only (that I know of) somewhat easily available medium format film sizes these days. 
View Quote
That must be pretty fun.

I've only seen a few medium format photos and the first thing that popped out was how individualized all the colors seemed

Even full frame has like a sensor tint/wash and all the colors kind of influence each other
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 7:00:49 PM EDT
Even though the film photo is superior to the digital photo, the digital photos are far easier to handle, no messing with dark rooms and photochemicals. I couldn't possibly afford to shoot the thousands of photos that I shoot a year on film.

Film has its place for the artsy craftsy types, but digital is where it is at.
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 7:34:24 PM EDT
What digital gear have you been using, lenses included?
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 7:38:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/19/2017 7:47:54 PM EDT by NorthPolar]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Wangstang:
What digital gear have you been using, lenses included?
View Quote
That is a very valid question to ask.  

Tech wise, digital beats film in terms of noise reduction and dynamic range (depends on your camera) and easily on the ISO side.  Most film has 13 stops of dynamic range, with your top of the line digitals pushing 14 or 15 (D810 almost hits 15)

So I'm wondering if OP just misses film grain or something?  Yeah the sensor noise has luminance and color changes, while film usually just does luminance changes for noise.  Then again, I try to run as close to base ISO as humanly possible to avoid all that.

For comparison, here's two from this weekend.
1. 1/125 f/9 ISO 140
2. 1/1250 f/9 ISO 4500


Link Posted: 6/19/2017 8:35:26 PM EDT
And yet your film images are represented digitally in this medium.

How do you go about converting film to digital?

There's got to be a D>A conversion somewhere down the line.

Me?  Digital is the way to go.
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 8:50:45 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/19/2017 9:23:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Jorge_Felix:

Digital looks like plastic shit to me after comparing side by side with film images.

http://i.imgur.com/yJjca73.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/RN18f5f.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/3ccFfTn.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/AWrcmBQ.jpg
View Quote
That is why it took so long for digital to make it to the big time. Same thing with music, digital can't touch analog. Film is the way to go for real quality.
Link Posted: 6/20/2017 10:18:03 AM EDT
film has a nice look but a medium format digital camera blows it out of the water in quality.
Link Posted: 6/20/2017 2:47:34 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Ciraxis:
film has a nice look but a medium format digital camera blows it out of the water in quality.
View Quote
Medium format rocks! but the price sucks
Link Posted: 6/20/2017 2:53:56 PM EDT
I halfway agree OP. Digital doesn't suck and I use it.

Something about capturing the actual lightwaves and imbedding them to film. It's like your capturing the physical moment on film. Digital is just a picture.  

Beautiful pics op 
Link Posted: 6/21/2017 2:25:07 AM EDT
Short of shooting with Fuji Velvia, my D70 was capable of producing cleaner images for prints than my film camera, and that was something like 13 years ago, and digital has only gotten better since.

I just walked past an 11x14 on the wall and couldn't remember whether it was a print from a slide or digital capture.  I shot the same subject with both.  And after checking my files, it looks like the print came from the digital capture.

The only time I used film after that was for nighttime photography, but my D800 can handles the night just fine.

For the 35mm format, digital blows away film.
Link Posted: 6/24/2017 6:38:26 PM EDT
I keep thinking about adding a film camera to my bog.
I miss shaking the developing can. But not so much that I'd likely throw out digital. Photoshop is just to tempting. Expanded ISO is a siren song. Adjusted color spaces, blended images, etc.
In the early days of digital, sure it was fairly pitiful - I still have 3 older Canons that sit in the defunct bag - but now? As much as I love film, even 2 1/4 format doesn't top it.
But that's just my opinion.
I'm not going to quibble if someone else wants to shoot film and shake the developer tank.
Link Posted: 6/24/2017 6:52:37 PM EDT
2 years of high school photography (film) and another
2 years of yearbook staff (film) I can tell ya digital rocks.

Sweaty light changing bags, film reels, nasty smelling
chemicals and cramped darkrooms. No thank you!

And no color!

I only wish I had digital back in the day.
Top Top