Film? Digital? AND THE THIRD ALTERNATIVE

[fotografz]

Both. That's the third alternative. Coexistance. All the stuff Jack is

talking about indirectly in his post is what I've been doing for

some time. I have the Kodak 645C ProBack for my Contax 645.

When I shoot with it I ALWAYS have film backs with me and a

variety of film. If I want a certain look I slap on a film back. Digital

is just another choice in the creative arsenal, and need not be

viewed as a replacement. For 35mm type work I use either a

Nikon D1x for speed or a Contax N Digital for more deliberate

work. But for that certain look I ALWAYS have my M cameras.

Even if Leica did come out with a 6 or 7 meg full frame M I'd still

keep the film Ms. Why would anyone give up the wonders of film?

Why would anyone ignore the wonders of digital? I just returned

from a week long TV production and carried my Contax N Digital

instead of a film camera. I can' t tell you how easy it was getting

through the 8 security levels I eventually had to endure during my

travels down South and to NY. While I've been writing this post

I've downloaded over 200 20 meg images, which I will quickly

review on Photoshops 7s' new browser for selection of only the

images I want to print now, and save all the rest to a single DVD

for use later if I want. The whole process will take about the

same time it would to just drive to the processors shop and back

twice. And I'm in control of the images instead of them. Long live

film AND digital...two peas in a pod. Oh a note: If my business

didn't allow the financial choice of both, I would stick with film, it's

still more versatile with more ISO choices, different color

characteristics, better B&W look and it still can be brought into

the digital domain if needed. It's just a less speedy process and

way more work.

[furcafe]

It's too bad that nobody makes a professional 35mm camera w/interchangeable backs anymore, like the Zeiss Ikon Contarex or late Contaflex, that would give 35mm users the option of digital backs.

[pcg]

Marc,

We're working almost identically. There's really no conflict in using film & digital interchangably. I

anticipate that that may change in 5 years as digital becomes more & more powerful & flexible.

We should assume that digital will soon easily offer all of the current characteristics of film, but

that's not the case today. It's a great time & we have more alternatives than ever. What's to

complain about?

[john_collier2]

35mm interchangable film backs AKA bodies.

 

You can buy user M bodies (or an VC R-2) for less than new film backs for MF

cameras.

[bobtodrick]

Have you guys heard about the new digi-M6. It uses the new Provia and TriX memory cards. 40 megapixels right out of the box. Amazing!!

[doug herr]

<I>35mm interchangable film backs AKA bodies</I>

<P>

Exactly how I work. Each of my film backs has a light meter, shutter and viewfinder attached. If you use outdated equipment it doesn't have to cost a fortune.

[albert knapp md]

Marc: It sounds quite logical but I suspect we will be dealing with

a ratio of 4 to 1 or greater in favor of digital. Our niche will survive

however.

[psychophoto]

It's the happy medium that makes sense. Digital and film both

have their strengths and weaknesses. Using both allows one to

make the best of both worlds. Unfortunately, so many people

seem resigned to their radically pro-film or "film is dead"

positions, they forget (or at least conveniently don't remember)

that one can use both. These tools can coexist. I just wish more

people would accept the fact that while digital is a great tool and

is on the rise, film is not dead, and it isn't dying either. Things

are just changing is all. This constant squabbling, with some

people joyfully proclaiming that digital is in every way superior to

film and that they just sold every piece of darkroom equipment

they owned because film is dead, and other people with the

reactionary position claiming that digital isn't a quarter of what

it's made up to be, is getting tiresome. Let's hear it for peaceful

coexistance.

[matthew_kerr]

Yeah. I use both now, though not on such hallowed equipment, Oly OM1n and leica digilux 1. Both have there place and I am certain it will be a VERY long time before the much better quality becomes a the feature of digital. But if that happens, I will still want to play with chemicals.

[karl_knize]

Have fun transfering all of your "important" hi-res stuff to different

storage media until you pass away, and then it becomes

someone else's responsibility.

[fotografz]

Karl, CD ROMs & DVDs are temporary "working" storage. I have

a 100 Gigabyte Drive that holds about 10,000 RAW image files

that is 1/2 the size of the shoe box most people store their paltry

number of negs in. And with the search programs, I can find a

specific "digital neg" in about the time it would take you to read

this posting. These drives are getting smaller in size and bigger

in storage, while the price keeps downsizing. Soon a 500 gig

drive the size of a pack of cigarettes will cost under $100. These

drives are the same as those in your computer. If that changes

it'll take all the effort of pressing a button and going to dinner to

transfer all the zillions of files to the new form of drive.

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

From an american friend I have known of the latest use of digital cameras, in combo with film, digital is used to check exposure and then film camera to make the shoots, don´t know if it is real, or if it is of any real use, because of diferent caracteristics of film and digital.

 

When digital talk we always dream of instant and magical posibilities, here is one of mine:

 

The idea of a back door and a rapid winder like digital accesories to convert a M into a digital M are well talked here, many dislike it, and is understood. Now what about a digital camera that can give us pictures of diferent lens qualities, you could make a picture with the glow of an elmar pre coated, or noctilux or a sonnar from the fouries, you choose it, 2000 lens designs into a digital body....yes is just a dream, and any film in history too. ; )