If we shoot film then scan

[dried_squid]

<p>The first reason, economics, is my 2 FEs and 5 lenses still work well, and I rarely shoot more than three rolls of film a month. The costs of film, processing, and scanning for three rolls a month is more manageable to me than the upfront purchase of a DSLR and a good modern zoom or two fixed autofocus lenses. There's some rank emotional fondness here, as in shared memories. Similarly with Kodachrome. Note: twice in 25 years, I've had to switch to the second body to keep shooting.</p>

<p>The second reason, lifestyle, is my day job. I work in IT. Mainly software. I manage the content on a website. So I sit at personal computer a lot at work. And, even at home, whether I'm doing personal stuff, or trying to learn something new, or writing documentation. And, it has occurred to me, that the reason my time and efforts in the name of photography were minimized back in the late 80's up until June 2008, perhaps 15 rolls in 20 years, was time around a computer - in many varied formats, from DOS handhelds to network applications. So now, with troubleshooting and advancing your grasp of any subject in mind, manual focus and exposure on transparency film seems so discrete, clear-cut, and matter-of-fact. So, it's relaxing. I like it. I feel fortunate to have returned to it.</p>

<p>The third reason, slides on a light table and enlargements. I like prints from slides To me, the intermediate step of a scan is no different from creating an internegative for the print. In either case, the slide remains the baseline. I've never acquired the skill to read a negative.</p>

<p>Probably, if the next big thing is a pocket light saber, I'll still hang on to my Case folding knife.</p>

<p>Have a nice Sunday.</p>