Film Vs. Digital

[hopking123]

So in photography wise film vs. digital has been a ongoing war and what not both with advantages and disadvantages. I myself think that one should start with a full manual Film camera and work your way to Digital to really appreciate what both sides have to offer. But I want to know what you think.

 

Should film photography hold its place as a starting point? Or should Digital rule all.

 

My input is I truly love film since its a much harder way to take photos and plus the quality of Film images is way better than any Digital picture.

[SirRoderick]

I don't see the point of using film anymore if you can use the easier, more durable and cheaper digital technology. Especially with 4K+ pictures and recording being a reality. I think when comparing a physical film print against a well realised digital print at this point it is practically impossible to tell the difference.

[dizmo]

I don't see the point in learning on a film camera. It's more expensive, the features are generally the same as with a D-SLR...and who wants to pay and have to travel to get their photos developed?

[hopking123]

I don't see the point of using film anymore if you can use the easier, more durable and cheaper digital technology. Especially with 4K+ pictures and recording being a reality. I think when comparing a physical film print against a well realised digital print at this point it is practically impossible to tell the difference.

i guess its like skill aspect that film is harder and you have to take time and actual skill to get a nice shot, rather than point and shoot. Plus darkroom developing is just more exciting than photoshop.

[SirRoderick]

i guess its like skill aspect that film is harder and you have to take time and actual skill to get a nice shot, rather than point and shoot. Plus darkroom developing is just more exciting than photoshop.

Well you know, cleaving text into stone and clay tablets takes more skill than typing and I'm sure sharp shards of rock flying around makes it more exciting. I just don't see how that makes it a practical option

 

Call me a pragmatist.

[Ivyk]

Well you know, cleaving text into stone and clay tablets takes more skill than typing and I'm sure sharp shards of rock flying around makes it more exciting. I just don't see how that makes it a practical option

 

Call me a pragmatist.

Wish I would have thought of such a statement.

[hopking123]

Well you know, cleaving text into stone and clay tablets takes more skill than typing and I'm sure sharp shards of rock flying around makes it more exciting. I just don't see how that makes it a practical option

 

Call me a pragmatist.

You're right, but i still think everyone should know how to use manual mode on a camera rather than auto, and thats why film is perfect for thos beginners. never know when you might want to over expose a shot or not.

[rhyseyness]

The quality of Film images is way better than any Digital picture.

Now let me open with this: I'm not that up to speed with photography. I don't take a lot of photos and my camera isn't amazing.

However, I do love photography and cinema. I can really appreciate an amazing photograph.

Good photography is one of my favourite things to browse the internet for.

 

I'd be interested to know what you think makes the quality of film images better than digital.

I've seen the same picture taken on both and digital and film camera, and I couldn't help but think the digital one looked much better.

Is it possible that the film camera was not set up well or something like that?

I'm not sure which has the greater image quality, and I'm inclined to agree with you, as you're clearly fairly well versed in photography.

It's just a topic that interests me. Could you shed some light on the situation? (pun intended )

 

Thanks

Rhys

[hopking123]

Now let me open with this: I'm not that up to speed with photography. I don't take a lot of photos and my camera isn't amazing.

However, I do love photography and cinema. I can really appreciate an amazing photograph.

Good photography is one of my favourite things to browse the internet for.

 

I'd be interested to know what you think makes the quality of film images better than digital.

I've seen the same picture taken on both and digital and film camera, and I couldn't help but think the digital one looked much better.

Is it possible that the film camera was not set up well or something like that?

I'm not sure which has the greater image quality, and I'm inclined to agree with you, as you're clearly fairly well versed in photography.

It's just a topic that interests me. Could you shed some light on the situation? (pun intended )

 

Thanks

Rhys

Its because digital is pixels and well a good digital picture virtually has no defined pixels you can see, it still is not as smooth as a film picture can be.

 

Film pictures are made when light from the lens reflects off the mirror inside the camera and onto the film, when it hits the film its exposed and produces a negative. and negitives are not pixels but are crystals witch have been exposed  and provide a higher quality imagine if taken right. and a negative can be printed up to any size and still maintain its crystal clear image. while a Digital picture when blown up can result in a very pixelated imagine 

[Unknown_Guy]

I'm not sure which has the greater image quality, and I'm inclined to agree with you, as you're clearly fairly well versed in photography.

It's just a topic that interests me. Could you shed some light on the situation? (pun intended )

As far as I know - film quality is better. It's like comparing your sight quality with digital. I think for very large prints film is still used. 4k might change that but it could still be not enough.

[rhyseyness]

Its because digital is pixels and well a good digital picture virtually has no defined pixels you can see, it still is not as smooth as a film picture can be.

 

Film pictures are made when light from the lens reflects off the mirror inside the camera and onto the film, when it hits the film its exposed and produces a negative. and negitives are not pixels but are crystals witch have been exposed  and provide a higher quality imagine if taken right. and a negative can be printed up to any size and still maintain its crystal clear image. while a Digital picture when blown up can result in a very pixelated imagine 

Very true, I understand the "resolution" issue.

With regard to colour depth and accuracy, film still better than digital?

[rhyseyness]

As far as I know - film quality is better. It's like comparing your sight quality with digital. I think for very large prints film is still used. 4k might change that but it could still be not enough.

An analogy I was going to use myself! lol.

What I really want to know is if film is capable of producing as good a colour & accuracy as digital is.

[hopking123]

yeah film can display really deep blacks and whites while digital can't really.

Digital also looses quality when zoomed in.

[rhyseyness]

yeah film can display really deep blacks and whites while digital can't really.

Digital also looses quality when zoomed in.

Thank you

That's interesting. I have a DSLR and now I'm tempted to invest in a film camera and see what I can do.

Any recommendations or things I should know before I dive in?

[Silvercall]

I shoot both film and digital (Digital, 35mm film, medium format film) and love the results i get with either form.  I find that when I shoot film, I am more deliberate with my composition and exposure.  I only have 24 shots (35mm) or even just 12 shots (medium format) to get the shot right.  And each shot cost money!  but when and if I get the shot right I am quite happy.  Digital is great as I can always change the white balance later, there is no need to scan the negative after developing and its just more convenient at times.  When I shoot film, I tend to shoot black and white as that's what I can develop at home in my bathroom.  Cant do color yet...  And while I really enjoy the process of developing my own film, not everyone would want to go to the trouble of doing it.  It reminds me of the time my wife asked why I was building my own computer when I could just go out and get it made.  I enjoyed the process

 

Medium Format Film (6x6 negative)

 

35mm film

 

35mm Colour Film

 

Digital (Nikon D300)

[Silvercall]

Thank you

That's interesting. I have a DSLR and now I'm tempted to invest in a film camera and see what I can do.

Any recommendations or things I should know before I dive in?

 

- Depending on your DSLR, it may be possible to use the lenses on both film and digital cameras.  You'll have to do some research about your camera system...

- When you buy film, you are pretty much stuck at one ISO until you switch rolls (in my experience).  You can shoot ISO 400 film as if it were 800 ISO or 1600 ISO but you have to do that for the whole roll otherwise the developing times may be screwed up. So bring the proper speed (ISO) film for the event/day.

-  There is a large used market online for used film gear.  You don't have to spend a ton in order to get good working gear.

- Have fun and enjoy the process!  I could have easily taken all my film shots with my digital camera. But I enjoy the slower and more deliberate process of taking photos with a film camera.  That said, when I know I need to react fast and "get the shot", like at a sporting event,I always use my digital.

[beavo451]

So in photography wise film vs. digital has been a ongoing war and what not both with advantages and disadvantages. I myself think that one should start with a full manual Film camera and work your way to Digital to really appreciate what both sides have to offer. But I want to know what you think.

 

Should film photography hold its place as a starting point? Or should Digital rule all.

 

My input is I truly love film since its a much harder way to take photos and plus the quality of Film images is way better than any Digital picture.

 

Film is going away. A skilled photographer that takes the same photo with a quality film and a quality digital camera with the equivalent processing is going to look the same. Side-by-side, you may notice slight differences, but I can guarantee you that you would not be able to definitively pick out film or digital shot each time.

 

Photos shot on 35mm film are not, by default, "way better" than digital. Nor are they "harder". All the basic principals of photography apply to digital. It is easier to learn on digital because the workflow is much faster.

 

i guess its like skill aspect that film is harder and you have to take time and actual skill to get a nice shot, rather than point and shoot. Plus darkroom developing is just more exciting than photoshop.

 

Um... Again, the basic skill required to get good pictures are the same for film or digital. Picking up a film camera does not make you more of a photographer, just like buying a SLR does not instantly make your photos better. If you call dealing with toxic chemicals "more exciting", then yes it is more exciting.

 

You're right, but i still think everyone should know how to use manual mode on a camera rather than auto, and thats why film is perfect for thos beginners. never know when you might want to over expose a shot or not.

 

This doesn't even make sense. Digital cameras have manual mode.

 

Its because digital is pixels and well a good digital picture virtually has no defined pixels you can see, it still is not as smooth as a film picture can be.

 

Film pictures are made when light from the lens reflects off the mirror inside the camera and onto the film, when it hits the film its exposed and produces a negative. and negitives are not pixels but are crystals witch have been exposed  and provide a higher quality imagine if taken right. and a negative can be printed up to any size and still maintain its crystal clear image. while a Digital picture when blown up can result in a very pixelated imagine 

 

The resolution of 35mm film is roughly 20 megapixels. That is why medium format and large format are used for really large prints. You will not be able to tell a resolution difference between a top quality ISO100 35mm film and a D800 shot when printed to the same size. Also, the basic operating principle is the same between a digital SLR and a film SLR. Hence the "SLR".

 

yeah film can display really deep blacks and whites while digital can't really.

Digital also looses quality when zoomed in.

 

More hogwash.

 

The dynamic range of film varies greatly depending on the film. Kodak claimed a dynamic range of 15 stops with Vision 3. Modern dSLRs can get 14 stops of dynamic range.

The further you "zoom in" on a film print, the grainier it gets. The further you "zoom in" on a digital shot, the more pixelated it gets. As to which one looses quality first, that would depend on the resolution.

[beavo451]

 

With regard to colour depth and accuracy, film still better than digital?

 

 

HIGHLY dependent on the film used. ISO speed, brand, model, etc.

[beavo451]

As far as I know - film quality is better. It's like comparing your sight quality with digital. I think for very large prints film is still used. 4k might change that but it could still be not enough.

 

For very large prints, medium format film, large format film, or medium format digital is used. 4K has nothing to do with it.

[Abir Vandergriff]

Film is going away. A skilled photographer that takes the same photo with a quality film and a quality digital camera with the equivalent processing is going to look the same. Side-by-side, you may notice slight differences, but I can guarantee you that you would not be able to definitively pick out film or digital shot each time.

 

Photos shot on 35mm film are not, by default, "way better" than digital. Nor are they "harder". All the basic principals of photography apply to digital. It is easier to learn on digital because the workflow is much faster.

 

 

Um... Again, the basic skill required to get good pictures are the same for film or digital. Picking up a film camera does not make you more of a photographer, just like buying a SLR does not instantly make your photos better. If you call dealing with toxic chemicals "more exciting", then yes it is more exciting.

 

 

This doesn't even make sense. Digital cameras have manual mode.

 

 

The resolution of 35mm film is roughly 20 megapixels. That is why medium format and large format are used for really large prints. You will not be able to tell a resolution difference between a top quality ISO100 35mm film and a D800 shot when printed to the same size. Also, the basic operating principle is the same between a digital SLR and a film SLR. Hence the "SLR".

 

 

More hogwash.

 

The dynamic range of film varies greatly depending on the film. Kodak claimed a dynamic range of 15 stops with Vision 3. Modern dSLRs can get 14 stops of dynamic range.

The further you "zoom in" on a film print, the grainier it gets. The further you "zoom in" on a digital shot, the more pixelated it gets. As to which one looses quality first, that would depend on the resolution.

You're probably on my list of favorite people ever because of this. That was just fantastic.

[rhyseyness]

- Depending on your DSLR, it may be possible to use the lenses on both film and digital cameras.  You'll have to do some research about your camera system...

- When you buy film, you are pretty much stuck at one ISO until you switch rolls (in my experience).  You can shoot ISO 400 film as if it were 800 ISO or 1600 ISO but you have to do that for the whole roll otherwise the developing times may be screwed up. So bring the proper speed (ISO) film for the event/day.

-  There is a large used market online for used film gear.  You don't have to spend a ton in order to get good working gear.

- Have fun and enjoy the process!  I could have easily taken all my film shots with my digital camera. But I enjoy the slower and more deliberate process of taking photos with a film camera.  That said, when I know I need to react fast and "get the shot", like at a sporting event,I always use my digital.

Thank you very much

Time to start researching.

Really appreciate your help

[the pokemon kid]

I think that the first camera to start with is a digital camera. I started with a digital camera which allowed me to take loads of photos and learn different techniques through trial and error. Film can be a bit limiting at the beginning because you aren't able to take a photo and immediately be able to see the results to whether the photo worked out or not. It takes a lot longer with film obviously to be able view the results with processing etc.

 

However, after a few years of doing photography I have found that I am buying more and more film cameras after learning how to use the digital SLR and the basics of photography skills. I find that when I am using my Bronica ETRSI that I take my time as I have a finite amount of photos which I can take with the film. I find that I take a lot longer composing and exposing the shot with the film cameras. This can be quite refreshing in comparison to digital SLR's where you can snap out loads of photos.

[Uhmkevinkev]

In my opinion film is much better because it give you the skill to frame the image and if you fail you miss a important shot and you just can not shoot recklessly because you only have 24-32 shots a film roll so it shows that you don't waste the moment.

[beavo451]

In my opinion film is much better because it give you the skill to frame the image and if you fail you miss a important shot and you just can not shoot recklessly because you only have 24-32 shots a film roll so it shows that you don't waste the moment.

You can shoot just as indiscriminately with film as you can with digital. If you aren't going to take the time to check your composition with a digital camera, you aren't going to do it with a film camera.

If you want a limited number of shots, go buy some 32MB memory cards.

[the pokemon kid]

In my opinion film is much better because it give you the skill to frame the image and if you fail you miss a important shot and you just can not shoot recklessly because you only have 24-32 shots a film roll so it shows that you don't waste the moment.

Its all about mind set. If you go out thinking that every shot counts, then you will take less shots which are more considered. Using film to learn is difficult because it can be more difficult to know if the shot is in focus/ exposed correctly/ composed correctly. You have to wait until the photos come back to see, this can mean that you don't get that all important shot because of the off exposed shot.