Shall we go back to film ?

[rashedahmed]

Thanks everyone who participated so far.I posted my question in Casual Photo Conversations but P.Net

transfered it to Business forum.Ok,fine.Clients gets confused seeing DSLR with BIG lens on it.If the dude says that his camera has 21 MP and the best on earth now,Clients think they got the right photographer.A few clients ask for portfolios or the dude is so cunning that the word 'portfolio' never had a chance to enters in their conversation.In South East Asia,price is a big issue.A few clients look for a good work.We say it " Quality or quantity,which first?" You can't expect to buy a latest Levies jean for U$ 5.00 from Macys.

 

Thanks to Jim McKinnon for having a look at my P.Net portfolio.I also do the same before making any

comments on serious issues.I wish other members will do the same.I enjoyed Howard Vrankin pro

issue too.

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>this must be a joke, i can see zero reason to go back to film, zero. . .</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If I was a wedding photographer (I'm not and don't ever want to be) I would not be able to put up with all the time spent post processing images on a computer. I would much rather hand the film over to a lab, get them to print proofs to create an album with then use the same lab for re-prints.<br>

<br /> Despite saying I don't ever want to be a wedding photographer, I did do two weddings for friends using this method last year. It was also the way my father worked for 30+ years.<br>

<br /> If you like post processing then fine, do it the digital way but if you would prefer to have some time to yourself, let a lab handle it. Or even shoot a mix of film and digital and see what your clients prefer (if they can actually tell the difference).<br>

<br /> What it comes down to is use whichever system suits you. Either way works, the end result to the customer is probably indistinguishable to them so make it a personal choice.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>So where are you going to buy it and have it processed? And aren't you then going to have it scanned and printed digitally anyway?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Not sure about labs where you are but in the UK there are labs who will process your film and give you a set of proofs and retain high quality scans so that you can re-order prints with just the serial numbers printed on the back of the proofs. No need to re-submit negatives.</p>

<p>I have used this system myself a couple of times and it works very well.</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>Steve Smith. I did a lot of weddings with film. There are some drawbacks to that as there are to digital. You are at the mercy of the processor when they return an entire wedding with bright red faces and you have to fight with them to get them to redo the pictures as your exposure and film was no different than a hundred other weddings that were ok. My proof delivery goal to the customer in an album was one week. I did my deliveries as soon as possible so as not to get backlogged like my competition. That gets tough if you're proceesor is not on time. You still have to edit and select prints and number them so the customer can order enlargements. I trashed my less than professional pictures. I could go on but sorting film proof prints is a lot of work and can be done faster, I think, digitally. You can't practically edit film negatives. Retouching is expensive and time consuming. I won't go into digital which is not easy either but obviously there is much more editing flexibility and a good workflow really speeds things. I am not saying which is better. I can work with either.</p>

[mark_davidson]

<p>"You are at the mercy of the processor when they return an entire wedding with bright red faces"</p>

<p>Or if there is a tragedy with the film processor you won't even get images.</p>

<p>The fact is that the genie is out of the bottle. Digital is a better tool and what infrastructure development there is in the pictorial world is being aimed at digital.<br>

It is the tool today , deal with it.</p>

<p>The major difference is that millions more can now get acceptable photos easily. That convinces a number of hobbyists that they can collect extra money by going "part-time pro". What they do is remove income for the hacks at the bottom of the market.<br>

Almost all posters in these forums are hobbyists or part-timers.<br>

A person who chooses to really learn the BUSINESS can succeed. It won't happen in a month or a year but will take a long time. If you really work AND learn you can have a good living.<br>

It has been said a thousand times that photography is a business that uses cameras to make money. For some reason people rarely learn that it is a business first and foremost. Study business and you can succeed. Art is important but far behind the art of getting a client to write a check.</p>

<p>I wonder if the food forums are filled with people who pretend to be working chefs?</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>I am not saying which is better. I can work with either.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I wouldn't judge one to be better than the other either. It's a pointless argument now as both are very good.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>It is the tool today , deal with it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I would say that both mediums are the tools of today and whichever one you are more comfortable with is the one you should use. The final customer probably could not care less or even notice a difference so it must come down to personal choice.</p>

[cathy_and_david_bock]

<p>Let me put it this way. It's not the equipment you use that matters, it's the images that you produce. It's not how good your photography is, it's what makes you different. If you're worried about someone using a DSLR and actually think using film is going to 'impress your client into hiring you' i think you'll be in for a shock. The client wants great images, that are unique with a photographer they trust. It's probably the last part that's most important. The reason they are hiring uncle bob is because they trust uncle bob. It DOES NOT MATTER what you use to produce your images, if you cannot gain trust with your client and convince them that you are the best one for the job you will indeed be out of work. </p>

<p>Why not try coming up with ideas of gaining trust with your client rather than ways to convince them you are a professional just because you shoot film. In the end, the bride doesn't care what you use, only that you can capture their day in a way that's worth paying for.</p>