Jump to content

Should digital users try film, and... vice versa?


ray .

Recommended Posts

No doubt, digital users, as good photogs, ideally, those who

haven't- should try shooting some film and get to the point where

they can make a good silver print. Those hanging on to film

should get some experience with a DSLR and find out what can

be done in photoshop. Might make attitudes a little less

dogmatic, at any rate...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 246
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm still working on learning to shoot and print film. I've been doing it over thirty years and it's still a challenge to me. When I feel I know everything about shooting and printing film, and reach a point of perfection such that it's no longer challenging or interesting, then I might move on to digital... but don't hold your breath on that because it probably won't happen in my lifetime. ;>)

 

Seriously, who has the time or can afford the investment in money to do what you suggest?

 

Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of people express very strong opinions around here...

Getting down in the trenches with both would lend more

legitimacy to whatever your viewpoint is. If you're not willing or

able to then maybe you should temper your comments

accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not talking HCB, most people don't have the luxury of hiring a

top notch printer. There's nothing like doing this stuff yourself to

know what's possible with the technology. If you're going to lack

knowledge in some areas of the medium, at least admit it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Ray's contending that people need to *own* a bunch of new gear.

 

In many cases, friends have dslr's. Take back all the !!*&^GU%$!! terrible things you've said to your dslr-owning buddy, and spend an hour or two with him/her and the camera. Snap some shots, then go back to the house and put a few on screen and watch what happens.

 

Same thing, in reverse, for those who've never really held/shot a film camera (or a rangefinder in particular), or if time permits, consider a darkroom visit.

 

Neither will become expert in what the other does, but you might have some fun.

 

Of course, one of my strongest positions in an argument might go right out the window: "Now don't confuse me with the facts ..." -:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reality once more struck at 10 AM today. I stopped by my friend Mike's portrait and wedding studio. He made another attempt to comvince me to buy his "old" DSLR "and I can send a LOT of work your way!" No offer of a cup of coffee like the old days. Worse, no suggestion to go down the block to get our coffee at the neighborhood donut shop. Nope. He was too busy squinting at the screen, tapping the keyboard, moving the mouse, extolling the virtues of...

 

Then he got up to get some papers from his office (the computer stuff is in the camera room) and he couldn't straighten out his back. He hobbled out of the studio holding his back, hunched forward, knees still bent, a pained look on his face. Too many hours on an ill fitting too tall stool, bent over the keyboard, and he's the first to admit it! But he loves what he can do with photoshop. He loves that prints spit out dry from the printer, cropped just so, and RIGHT NOW!

 

He's been the film route. He has a complete wet 1-Hour lab in house and another machine for wet printing 20x30 posters. He just loves playing on the computer. There's no getting away from that fact. The fortune in hardware and software? Not a consideration. How can you argue with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ray:

 

I don't have to worry about working for a news agency or some other photographic enterprise where digital is mandatory; there is no compelling reason for me to learn digital. So the question I have to ask myself is whether digital will make me a better photographer? Here, we are rather often reminded by some that it's not the equipment that matters, it's the photographer. And I agree... although I think I now understand the concept sufficiently and don't need to be reminded anymore.

 

There are some on PN who think my pictures are "boring", "cliched" and, basically, "suck". Wouldn't my time therefore be better spent learning to be a better photographer rather than learning digital? If I follow the prevailing argument on PN then different equipment won't make me a better photographer.

 

Digital is ubiquitous... even I've played around with other people's digital cameras. I've seen enough of it to appreciate what they like about digital... and what needs of theirs digital may better serve. But, for me, I see no reason to learn digital.

 

Ray, at one time you were a prolific and enthusiastic Leica shooter. Did you go digital? Did it make you a better photographer?

 

Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ray, the only people I know who shoot digital and have never shot film are rank newbies. After all, digital has only gotten good and affordable in the last few years. The people blasting film and extoling the superiority of digital seem to all be former film shooters.

 

I've shot digital (20D). Being able to shoot color indoors at ISO 1600 without speed-robbing filtration, and then to get much less "noise" than ISO 1600 film's got grain, and to get the effect of a 1.6 teleconverter with no loss lens speed or image quality were great features. Someday I may shoot completely digital, but right now I'm in no hurry. As long as film is available I can wait and watch as digital technology evolves further and prices on equipment drops (well, other than Leica who raise their prices even when facing bankruptcy). Nobody's going to refuse to sell me a digital camera in 2010 just because I didn't jump on the bandwagon in 2005.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, I can't read Ray's mind, but I think he was gently suggesting that a fair amount of advice gets handed out in this forum from people who are proud of their ignorance of much technology that has evolved in the past 50 years or so. I think he was suggesting that rather than dishing out opinions based on little more than stale prejudice, forum participants actually spend a few hours doing something other than sucking their collective thumbs. At least that's how I read it, though I certainly could be wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After a lifetime of film, I've spent five years in digital, and I prefer film. It's much more intuitive to me, and the learning curve is easier than the software required to post process digital images. Digital produces a fast image, but post processing takes all the fun out of it. The jargon connected with digital software and computers in general is just too much for me to bear. Buggy programs don't help one bit, either!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a 'shooter' and my tools are sometimes film and sometimes digital. I don't realy think any differently about the subject I'm pointing my 'tool' at when working with either. Scanned film or RAW digital files get roughly the same treatment in Photoshop and after spending yers in the darkroom I don't miss it at all. A traditional darkroom background of messing about with enlargers and trays of chemicals won't IMO give you any advantage over someone who has sat down and learnt Photoshop properly and it certainly won't change the way you look at or photograph your subjects or environment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: "Should digital users try film, and... vice versa?"

 

Sure, why not? I did. Trying to figure out a digicam so I can shoot is like trying to program my newest TV so I can watch. No thanks. Too complicated---and by the time I figure it out there'll be 3 replacements of a new and improved model and broadcast TV will have gone to HD, but with a price. Let's leave digital to the children. They are the future, afterall. That's what I think. ;*)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe those who can make a good silver print should have a serious attempt to learn digital rather than just coming out with the same old nonsense about how rubbish/time consuming/complicated/doughnut depriving/back aching it all is.

 

"Let's leave digital to the children" yeh Frank digital is sooo new.

 

I have been in IT since 1979 and I know people who have made a lifetimes career of computers/digital electronics since they were at college and they are now retired men in their 60s! Digital music (not just CD) is 1970s technology despite the fact that it has only been in the shops for 23 years it has been around in the studio longer than that. Digital SLRs celebrate their 15th year this year.

 

Can we forget this idea that digital is some cheap 'here today gone tomorrow' plastic novelty item that the world will get tired of.

 

What I get get tired of is people whingeing about all this so called 'new fangled' technology! (Technology that was actually around when Al Kaplan was a teenager.) In those days only the 'high priests' of computing working for governments, universities and the military and large companies were allowed to (or could afford to) use this technology because it was so expensive. Over the last 30 years hundreds of thousands of very clever people and some very enterprising companies have dragged the computer from the clutches of the 'establishment' and stuck it in your living rooms and it only costs a few hundred dollars. Yet you still whine. The same people have moved mountains to make it simple for you to use with swishy pictures and kindergarten pointy clickey operating systems. Yet you still whine. (Try a few real old fashioned operating system like MVS/XA or JES2 or VM or OS-400 or VTAM or CICS if you think your PC is complicated.)

 

So the worlds biggest companies and finest technologists and scientists and nobel prize winners have bust their b*lls to democratise computing and enable you and I to perform what were dreams & miracles 50 years ago for a few hundred dollars and you say "it is a childs toy" or a 'gimmick' or the pointy clickey pictures are too complicated. Boo hoo.

 

And now someone is seriously suggesting that I have to qualify to use a digital camera by making my own silver based prints first. WHAT!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...