Judddude Loc: Missouri

Bah humbug....lol.

Merlin1300 Loc: New England, But Now & Forever SoTX

Hmmm - - does acidifying your developer bath help the tonal quality on the Kodachrome?? :shock:

Merlin1300 Loc: New England, But Now & Forever SoTX

Haven't shot film since 1995. OBTW - Frangeo - - I'd definitely like to have one of those - - {cars? - bottom Pg 10}
.
Also - if unsure about the exposure on digital - just set the camera for auto-bracket & push the button - ONE of the three will be PERFECT!

Jer Loc: Mesa, Arizona

I read the article from gadgetlab. How old is the article, good modern digital cameras don't have those problems. A few years ago, sure but not now.

Judddude Loc: Missouri

Bah humbug....lol. Time to trade in the horse and buggy as well.

Jer Loc: Mesa, Arizona

Yes, I think everyone has noticed scobie hasn't been back.
Probably because no one agrees with him.
I know that digital is more complicated that film but wow the options we not have. But you don't have to use them if you don't want to.

Happy photography everyone, regardless of what you use.

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

Not sure.Only know that acidifying your brain brings out some wild colors, man. :thumbup:

StonyClove Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

Scubie, it sounds like you are using a cheap lens on a crummy camera set to a low resolution JPEG capture setting, and then viewing the results on a cheap and/or poorly calibrated monitor. When I first started using digital, about 12 years ago, I was shooting images for clients that were used on billboards with a 6 megapixel camera. The billboards looked great. Thousands of working pros all over the world have acknowledged that digital puts a better paint brush in your hand. That is no guarantee you will paint a better picture. If you want to milk the digital revolution for all it has to offer, you have to accept that the tools and capabilities of the post-production phase are as essential to quality imagemaking as the lens or camera. Yeah, it's a money pit - always has been. We have to spend wisely and use our equipment to its maximum capabilities if we hope to make any money at this game. How does that differ from the film world?

flytyer57 Loc: Mountain Home, Arkansas

I have a Canon 550D which has an 18 megapixel cropped sensor. I recently had a photo from it blown up to a 20x30 and I don't see anything in the picture to complain about. The problem you are having is the low megapixel rating of your camera. Truly, the more the mega pixels, the better for print size.

The Watcher

I've been receiving daily e-mails from this site for about a month now. I find many of the topic interesting with lots of good answers. I've also been directed to other sites that I was unaware of. I'm a longtime photographer that started in the early seventies with 35mm cameras. I later decided that 6x7 would become my film size and moved in that direction. With cameras and a custom built darkroom geared to handle the 6x7 format. By trial and error and doing everything myself,except retouching negatives. Over time I become very good at shooting, developing and printing. Today, all of my film based equipment is put away. every few months I'll pull out my big camera with the four lens, and work their leaf shutters to keep them working properly. Now my medium is digital. I have several nonpro cameras, a 5mp and a Nikon 10mp with two lens. I also have a Epson photo printer that cost around a hundred dollars and a top of the line in its day Epson scanner. I can make beautiful 8x10 with my 5mp camera from jpeg files. I think the fellow who started this topic, needs to take the time to learn the digital medium. As for myself that would be understanding your camera. buy a good program like Photoshop Elements and a good photo printer. and learn how to combine all these elements. The great thing about digital photography is you get to see your image right away and that alone will help you become a better photographer.

GENorkus Loc: Washington Twp, Michigan

I ditto Captain C's quote, (even though I like your talk about the Fovien (sp?) sensor.)

Many photographers are going back to film cameras mainly because they can't justify the expense for the guns.

If you obtain a newer up-to-date digital, I bet you'll have a hard time detecting the difference.

Should you have the cash, they're now taking pre-release orders for the new Nikon D800E and the specs clams to blow away all but a few other digitals.

flytyer57 Loc: Mountain Home, Arkansas

I do believe that new Nikon D800 has a 36.6 megapixel sensor which should allow you to blow up a picture VERY large.

Satanta Loc: N.C.

I miss film but do not miss the costs and with digi I can shoot/edit and have print-ready in minutes instead of days.

Benefits to both but I think it won't be much longer before film goes the way of 8-tracks and cassettes.

Pepper Loc: Planet Earth Country USA

What happened to “it aint the stove it’s the chef” or “it aint the arrow it’s the Indian”? What happen to the guy who can shoot a wedding with a cell phone? This pixel stuff and digital vs film debate seems to fly in the face of the “equipment doesn’t matter” chatter. Seems we just take whatever side of a debate that suits us at the time….just sayin.

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

I'm beginning to wonder if Scubie was interested in how we felt at all... 11 pages, no reply.

I'm thinking it's time to "unwatch"....