Wedding photography: Digital RAW or filmscans

[auke bonne van der weide]

If shooting a wedding, what would you prefer. Shooting with a DSLR or

go with Nikon F80 and Metz 54-MZ3 and shoot on film, and scan them

slides or negatives later. Would you prefer image-quality, or that

one special shot that I wouldn't make with film, but would have shot

anyway with digital. And what about the dust-problem if changing

lenses in a rush at the wedding, etc. Or shoot both. I ask of you the

world-dilemma, but don't hesitate. The only bad answer is no answer:0)

[Jerry_]

If you shoot 150 exposures at the wedding: do you really have time to 'scan' in each negative and tweak? Have you a good lab that can take that many digital images and provide you with a set of decent proof prints? You are going to shoot a wedding and you have to make a decision on what camera will be best for your needs.

 

 

 

No one can predict the future until it has become history: there is no answer for your "that one special shot that I wouldn't make with film," statement.

[ray]

I used to shoot weddings on film but have switched to a RAW workflow with a digital

slr. Naturally, there is a learning curve to doing something new.

 

Shooting with a dSLR requires watching the highlights a bit more carefully but the

benefits are enormous. I no longer have to pay to have to purchase, refrigerate and

process film. I can edit the images on the spot when I have a break. On the

downside, you need enough storage space for all the RAW->Tiff files you'll end up

with and an efficient workflow to manage the volume of files.

 

Dust is not really a issue with weddings (unless shooting on a beach). I clean out my

camera every few months and even then there isn't much to clean out.

 

I can't even imagine having to scan all the negs -- who has the time if you're shooting

weddings on a regular basis ?