Now I know why people abandoned film

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>I have dropped many a film cameras, picked them up and they still work. Can you say that with a digital camera? </p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Whether or not it's true, as Mike Dixon points out, one's photography is judged by the photographs, not by the state of the camera. BTW, I have dropped digital cameras and not one stopped working, so you can say it.</p>

[eddy_d]

<p>I know many people who have dropped their digital cameras and had to have them repaired and I never had a problem after dropping my film cameras so that is why I say that.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I've seen Canon AE-1 bodies pretty much destroyed by dropping them - the resin prism housing and top plate were pretty fragile compared with polycarbonate.</p>

<p>Recently a fellow photo.netter mentioned he dropped his new Olympus TG-2. No damage. Granted, it's from the Olympus "tough" camera lineup, but even the cheapest of that TG-iHS series is considered pretty darned impact resistant.</p>

<p><a href="/casual-conversations-forum/00Od5N"><strong>Here's a link</strong></a> to a 2008 thread with plenty more anecdotes about camera toughness, all of which proves precisely... that... well... everyone has an anecdote about dropping cameras that proves... umm... something...</p>

[eddy_d]

<p>And speaking of shooting film. Doesn't Jerry Uelsmann and Albert Watson still shoot film?</p>

[gerber_van_der_graaf]

Mostly I do not go through these type of discissions as I am fed up about the discussions digital versus analog phtography. Though I must admit this has been a very interesting thread and I enjoyed reading it.

 

To the OP: if cost is really an issue, I wonder if digital is really cheaper than analog. Digital equipment is expensive as well and mostly obsolete after about less than 5 years due to technological innovation. I admit digital photography has its conveniences, that is the reason it has found its place. Thanks to that, many photogs abandoned analog and a huge amount of good equipment became available during the last years. It's not too hard to find professional analog equipment, cameras and darkroom, for reasonable prices. I took the advantages of this, picked up some equipment of my dreams (35, MF and LF) and will continue to shoot analog, despite the fact its harder to find film, paper and chemicals. Life has already become digital more than enough to my feeling, in private spheres and professionally. As I am shooting as a hobby, I do not want to stick again to some computer and prefer to do some physical work in the darkroom.

[wblynch]

<p>It is actually easier to get film, paper and chemicals now than ever before.</p>

<p>With the internet everything is a mouse click away. You don't even have to get the Yellow pages out and call all over the place, or get in your car and drive around looking for stuff.</p>

<p>(although the driving around from shop to shop was a lot of fun in the "olden days". A great way to spend a Saturday, burning 30 cent gas and stopping at A&W for a Root Beer!)</p>

[donbright]

<p>Today, Labor day, in Labor day traffic I just drove 60 miles to pick up some film at Samy's in Santa Ana. I had to have the film today, I could not wait until tomorrow, I have plans for the film tomorrow. At 29 miles per gallon, thats about $15.50 for gas. The pictures will look marvelous! didn't go to A+W, but I did stop off at In+Out.</p>

[songki_park]

<p>Film only costs around 5-10$ or so at the local pharmacy where I'm located at, and a lot of the enlargers/darkroom equipment is a very cheap grab nowadays. I started off shooting digital with a Canon, moved to the EOS A2 SLR film and I never went back. Film always has spectacular results, and some things that you just can't duplicate in Adobe for that matter.</p>