Digital vs Film (Page 15): The photographer who took the photo of "The Catch" used "Spray and pray" with a film camera with a motor drive, and by a miracle, one of the frames caught...

therwol Loc: USA

JohnSwanda wrote:

"Spray and pray" implies mindlessness, but you can use burst mode in a thoughtful manner if it's called for.

The photographer who took the photo of "The Catch" used "Spray and pray" with a film camera with a motor drive, and by a miracle, one of the frames caught the exact moment when Dwight Clark's hands touched the football. It's not a new technique, and it serves a purpose. Digital has made it easier.

anotherview Loc: California

We might agree that film photography and digital photography offer two different ways of doing photography.

This statement, "the incremental cost of film encourages us to be more deliberate," we may agree inherently disciplines the film photographer.

Yet, a digital photographer too may take the same care in devising a shot. In fact, unless he does so, he will never rise beyond a snapshooter.

After all, at bottom, photography functions as a craft. Skill, patience, experience, and diligence mark both the film photographer and the digital photographer.

selmslie wrote:

Of course you can. My point is that the incremental cost of film encourages us to be more deliberate.

I use both digital and film all of the time. I know that film forces me to approach things differently because of the cost and effort involved.

I should not have to defend every statement I make.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

anotherview wrote:

We might agree that film photography and digital p... (show quote)

If you really want to see the effect, try using medium or large format film. I might be hard pressed to finish a roll of 120 or more than four sheets of 4x5 in a day of landscape photography.

With digital I can capture about 30 decent digital images in an hour at a car show or a rookery. I would not dream of using film that fast.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

anotherview wrote:

...This statement, "the incremental cost of film encourages us to be more deliberate," we may agree inherently disciplines the film photographer.

Yet, a digital photographer too may take the same care in devising a shot. In fact, unless he does so, he will never rise beyond a snapshooter.

After all, at bottom, photography functions as a craft. Skill, patience, experience, and diligence mark both the film photographer and the digital photographer.

True. Very true. But in our "Convenience Store Society", I perceive that many, if not most, newbies who buy a digital camera will appreciate the ability of capturing (in their eyes) "great shots" by simply putting the camera om "Auto-Everything" and holding down the shutter button until "something magical" happens. Why take the time and effort to actually Learn the craft when the camera "does so much?" As evidence, I point out the myriad of sunset photos posted almost daily in the Photo Gallery. Composition? Exposure? Leveling? Frankly, I think we "Hogs" have our work cut out for us as advisor/instructors.

anotherview Loc: California

From what I gather from the history of photography, snapshooters have always been with us. Kodak catered to this crowd. Nothing has changed -- except now we may crab about this situation online for all to see.

cameraf4 wrote:

True. Very true. But in our "Convenience Stor... (show quote)

DaveC1 Loc: South East US

anotherview wrote:

From what I gather from the history of photography, snapshooters have always been with us. Kodak catered to this crowd. Nothing has changed -- except now we may crab about this situation online for all to see.

From a vendor perspective, that's where the money was and where the money will be. Follow the money.

anotherview Loc: California

Agree:

DaveC1 wrote:

From a vendor perspective, that's where the money was and where the money will be. Follow the money.

adm

This has been an interesting thread, despite the fact that it is the only one where I feel I was treated in a less than courteous manner (by one person only). As someone pointed out above, this really boils down to a philosophical argument or a "religious war," as it were. I doubt I will chime in on this topic again if it comes up (and it almost certainly will). As in most religioius wars, people on one side of the divide are not going to convince those on the other. Amen.

Streets Loc: Euless, TX.

I will guarantee that no one who is currently shooting digital would ever revert to film only. Film photography can only titillate those with loads of time on their hands and a similar load of funds. This HAS been an interesting thread and I was surprised at the large number of film users that were still around. Now, I must get back to post-processing my last batch of clicks.

BebuLamar

Streets wrote:

I will guarantee that no one who is currently shooting digital would ever revert to film only. Film photography can only titillate those with loads of time on their hands and a similar load of funds. This HAS been an interesting thread and I was surprised at the large number of film users that were still around. Now, I must get back to post-processing my last batch of clicks.

For me I don't use film often any more because as you know you live in the Dallas, TX area and there is no store I can go to to buy Portra, Provia or Ektar film. I have to buy them online and I generally don't like buying online. Another problem is that B&H won't ship chemicals needed for me to process my RA-4 paper. Don's photographic do sell these film but they run out so often. Competitive Camera laughed at me when I asked to buy film.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Streets wrote:

.... Film photography can only titillate those with loads of time on their hands and a similar load of funds. ....

Not quite the case here.

I have time on my hands but I can use my limited funds to keep my medium and large format equipment up to date.

If I tried to keep up with digital technology, I wouldn't be able to afford it. My last three acquisitions were a D610, an A7 II and a Df - none of them cheap and they are depreciating rapidly.

My used Leica M6 and Rolleiflex each cost less than any of the three digital cameras and they have pretty much stopped depreciating. My used Nikon FM2n was cheap in comparison and in like new condition.

B&W film and chemicals to develop it cost me less than $6/roll ($0.50 per frame for medium format or $0.17 for 35mm). I can get enough images if I don't waste frames.

I would need to go through a lot of images with any of the digital cameras before I break even on total costs.

You can do the math if you like but at my age the trade-off is about other factors besides economics.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

BebuLamar wrote:

For me I don't use film often any more because as you know you live in the Dallas, TX area and there is no store I can go to to buy Portra, Provia or Ektar film. ...

My color work is mostly digital.

I don't mind buying film online but nobody in Jacksonville, FL will develop E6 so I have to send it to Gainesville. Color negative is less of a hassle but I still have to drop it off (half hour ride) or mail it from here.

jakraig

cameraf4 wrote:

Very good points, Alan. And well written, too. About the older Nikon glass, I wouldn't recommend them on APS-C (DX) Nikons, even though many may "work", for the reasons you have given. That said, I use Nikon FX DSLRs and the older lenses (AF and manual focus) work on my FX digitals, in some cases better than they ever did on film SLRs.

I'm old so I have used a lot of old glass although I don't have most of it any more, but, there is one extraordinary lens in that classification, the Nikon 70-210 F:4. What a wonderful crisp lens from end to end. They are still to be had today at really cheap prices. If you see one snap it up, you will be impressed.

jakraig

rmalarz wrote:

In the first set note the pen with which the offic... (show quote)

Bob, you obviously haven't tried a D850 yet, it shames your pitiful examples.

BebuLamar

selmslie wrote:

My color work is mostly digital.

I don't mind buying film online but nobody in Jacksonville, FL will develop E6 so I have to send it to Gainesville. Color negative is less of a hassle but I still have to drop it off (half hour ride) or mail it from here.

I do very little B&W in the pass 40 years plus. I did a lot of darkroom work but they were almost all color.