Film VS Digital (Page 5): Back before I ever went digital, I sent some Kodachrome 25 slides off to a professional, and he returned some 6 MP images to me. I set up my slide projector...

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Darkroom317 wrote:

Not exactly. Grain size and structure is determined by formula and the speed as which potassium bromide/ iodide is added to the silver nitrate gelatin solution. T-grain films have a different structure than cubic grain films. However, if you meant the grain structure is the same across formats of the emulsion you are correct. As far as the scanner, is that 3600 ppi the actual resolution or an inflated interpolated number?

Back before I ever went digital, I sent some Kodachrome 25 slides off to a professional, and he returned some 6 MP images to me. I set up my slide projector in the same room where my computer was, and every detail I could find on a slide was also on the image. That experiment was my initial reason for expecting that down-scaling to 6 MP would keep the original details.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

rehess wrote:

It would depend partly on what kind of scanner he uses. My experience with flatbed scanners, which are the only ones I'm aware of that will handle MF, was not good. Any imperfection at all on the film was included in the image, so I spent a lot of time cleaning up the image to get it to what I was getting straight out of my digital camera.

Use an EPSON V-series with Digital ICE and you'll lose the dust and scratches. It's amazing what those scanners can do.

chaprick

Mark7829 wrote:

One of the real advantages of digital is low light capabilities. The newer cameras such as the Nikon D5 and D500 have incredible low light capability. Film certainly has its advantages but digital offers much greater control, and flexibility.

I'm trying to see the advantages of film and it is almost invisible. I really do hate to let it go but I'm afraid it is kind of like having an old wired rotary phone. They worked great and would take a beating but they are impractical today.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

burkphoto wrote:

Better for what? What is the intended product or output?

A digital camera is better for almost any professional workflow.

A film camera you already have is better for your budget, when the customer is YOU, and/or you only need that quality on occasion, or for specific subject matter and output that your digital gear can't handle.

As usual approaching from the professional, just numbers viewpoint. I don't think anyone can argue about digital's fantastic usability in this section. I use digital for much of professional work.

However, aesthetic considerations and aspects for art is another matter. Again as we have been round and round on this. Why is there still oil paint when acrylic is newer and easy to work with. Well, because they have different qualities drying time, luminosity etc... Much of ones joy of using certain materials is intangible. It is this way across all artistic media

Kuzano

burkphoto wrote:

br The main reasons people cling to film are: br... (show quote)

Mr Burk,

Love your smile.... you look like a very happy person.

You tend to be factual and correct in your informative posts, and for the photographer whose income depends on photography, I am quite confident your post is right on for that person.

However, you left out what I consider the WAY most popular reason why some of us hang on to film.

IT'S JUST INCREDIBLY CHALLENGING and as a result, INCREDIBLY FUN. I am having so much fun processing my film in Folgers Instant Coffee and a couple of other household ingredients.... as well as enlarging and printing using that chemistry.... Caffenol Baby!!!!

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

rgrenaderphoto wrote:

Wouldn't you loose image quality going from a analog film media to a digital file? Why not switch to digital completely?

OBTW, I have friends with extensive 33 rpm record collections who won't make the switch to digital music either.

The quality and tonal range you can pull out of a film negative is much greater than the quality you can print *optically* from it.

A decade ago, many photographers and labs would scan film and print on EPSON's best inkjet printers.

In the early 2000s, I helped set up and then ran the digital side of a pro lab. We had high end film scanners and laser mini-labs (Noritsu MP1600 and 31Pro, plus a Durst Theta and several other printers), along with EPSON 9600 and 9880 printers.

So I know from experience that, done correctly, the quality of film scanned and printed on high end inkjet printers blows optical prints away, along with digital prints made on silver halide paper from the same scans.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

chaprick wrote:

I'm trying to see the advantages of film and it is almost invisible. I really do hate to let it go but I'm afraid it is kind of like having an old wired rotary phone. They worked great and would take a beating but they are impractical today.

Prints from MF and LF film is very good, grains vs pixels and there are creative opportunities in the dark room. But there is no future in film.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Mark7829 wrote:

Prints from MF and LF film is very good, grains vs pixels and there are creative opportunities in the dark room. But there is no future in film.

Tell that to these guys: http://www.filmferrania.it/

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Kuzano wrote:

Mr Burk, br br Love your smile.... you look like... (show quote)

:thumbup:

As long as you're having fun... Keep doing it!

I still have all my old Nikon film cameras and darkroom gear from my late teens. It all works perfectly. I haven't used it in over a decade, though. I'm having too much fun with digital.

I turned every hobby and college experience I had into a job producing AV shows in the early '80s. After eight years of working 40 to 70 hour weeks (salaried no overtime!) I was burned out on photography, so I took a systems job in the lab.

I didn't pick up a "serious" film camera for over a decade! But digital imaging is what really rekindled my joy in photography.

These days, it's seeing what I can do with m43 hybrid media (video including stills, graphics, and audio), when I'm not fooling around with my iPhone.

DickE Loc: Southern California

Wow! You really point out many advantages of digital over film that, as an amateur photographer, I would never have known. Thank you for the insight into commercial photography. I think many of these advantages translate to my use of digital as well.

Kuzano

chaprick wrote:

I'm trying to see the advantages of film and it is almost invisible. I really do hate to let it go but I'm afraid it is kind of like having an old wired rotary phone. They worked great and would take a beating but they are impractical today.

There is the potential for one redeeming aspect of film or wet photography.

We may have put Iran off for a few years, but if N Korea persists, the bombs fall and the ElectroMagnetic Pulses take out our digital capabilities.

We will still be able to mix and coat Wet Plates, and return to the photography of Carleton Watkins, when he used to mix his chemistry in a tent on the banks of the Columbia River. This was shown in the great Video "The River They Saw", which you can still view at OPB.COM or Oregon Public Broadcasting.

You will also see the Paddle Wheel Riverboat/Darkroom that plied the waters of the Columbia, owned and piloted by two socialites from Portland Oregon. Members of the Photographic Society of Portland Oregon.

One specialized in scenics of the Columbia Gorge, and the other captured the history of Native American tribes along the river.

Just remember, we may all be revisiting film if N Korea persists. Keep a couple of film camera's and some refrigerated film on hand.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Darkroom317 wrote:

...Much of ones joy of using certain materials is intangible. It is this way across all artistic media

I can agree with this.

Frankly, I don't care what another person's medium is, at all.

I do care deeply about the message. I just want to be able to receive and understand it.

If an artist feels that a particular medium is instrumental in conveying that message, that's his or her decision, choice, prerogative, etc. If it feels good, use it.

Some of us do not think of our work as 'art' that we produce to make ourselves feel good, so much as we simply wish to communicate for some practical purpose. I'm coming mostly from that perspective, as I've spent most of my life explaining things to people through words and images used for training, sales promotions, and journalistic purposes.

Any medium I use, whether video, live voice, audio of voice, words on screens or in print, images in print, or images on screens, has to convey the desired message... nothing more, nothing less.

Efficiency is an important part of that process. For my needs, digital is efficient and effective.

rfmaude41 Loc: Lancaster, Texas (DFW area)

chaprick wrote:

I'd like to see one of your 6X7 negatives that will print an 8X10 without cropping....

True, but it's pretty close to 8X10, however, how much is the (minimum) crop for a digital camera with a 2X3 ratio, about 25 - 30% maybe??

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

chaprick wrote:

I'm trying to see the advantages of film and it is almost invisible. I really do hate to let it go but I'm afraid it is kind of like having an old wired rotary phone. They worked great and would take a beating but they are impractical today.

At some point in the '90s, my wife made me sell my 1959 Western Electric rotary dial phone I bought from the phone company in the early '80s when they were selling off their old gear.

I LOVED that phone. It was the best sounding telephone I ever used. Western Electric would recycle those phones for AT&T over several decades, just putting new shells on them and plugging in new handsets and cords. The guts were built like tanks.

My iPhone 6s Plus beats the crap out of that old phone, though! It slices, it dices, it crawls on its belly like a reptile!

pete-m Loc: Casper, WY

Darkroom317 wrote:

Medium format is not only square. 6.45 x 6, 6x6, 6x7, 6x8, 6x9, 6x12 and 6x17 are all sizes that can be shot on 120 film. 6x7 is my main format. It enlarges to 8x10 without cropping.

Me too