|
|
|
gries818
|
 Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:06 pm |
|
|
|
Respected Member
of PROnetworks
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 6543
|
|
I personally prefer digital because I love to photo retouch and plus I find it easier.
I guess some people swear by film so its a question worth asking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
jojo
JoAnn Kosowan |
|
Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:19 pm |
|
|
|
Management
Administrative
Joined: 06 May 2002
Posts: 12634
Location: Alberta, Canada
|
I'll never go back to film, for as poor a photographer as I am, I need to be able to delete, delete.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
fireman604
|
|
Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:29 pm |
|
|
|
PRO Level 3
Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 78
Location: Homer Ak
|
|
Instant gratification is great. Also great being able to send photo around the world for opinion or just to show off. Digital is the way to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
augie
Algis Koscus |
|
Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:34 pm |
|
|
|
Management
Community Discussion
Joined: 25 Aug 2002
Posts: 17504
Location: Laurentians, Quebec
|
I voted digital but I still miss the vinegary smell of the darkroom.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
gries818
|
|
Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:38 pm |
|
|
|
Respected Member
of PROnetworks
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 6543
|
|
even some of the pro photographers are switching to digital because its so much quicker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
kanaloa
John C. Derrick |
|
Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:49 pm |
|
|
|
Founder
Joined: 09 Mar 2002
Posts: 43381
Location: Columbia, SC
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
rippinchikkin
David Hale |
|
Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:58 pm |
|
|
|
Vice President
Syndication
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 21203
Location: 32° 27' , -93° 42'
|
|
Well I guess you guys are going to leave it up to the old photographer to wave the film banner...
IMO film has a feel and clarity that cannot be beat (still at this point) by digital, there is just something about a continuous tone photo, a richness, a quality that digital just does not have. In my opinion I doubt that digital will ever reach that level. Not to say that digital isn’t worth it, I doubt very seriously that I would by another film camera (but I have a closet full, so I have no need) But if I was getting into fine art or photography as a living, well film still has its place.
FWIW
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
Knight Rider
Reid Jones |
|
Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:59 pm |
|
|
|
PRO Level 17
Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 2178
Location: CANADA...EH!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
gries818
|
|
Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:08 pm |
|
|
|
Respected Member
of PROnetworks
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 6543
|
| rippinchikkin wrote: |
Well I guess you guys are going to leave it up to the old photographer to wave the film banner...
IMO film has a feel and clarity that cannot be beat (still at this point) by digital, there is just something about a continuous tone photo, a richness, a quality that digital just does not have. In my opinion I doubt that digital will ever reach that level. Not to say that digital isn’t worth it, I doubt very seriously that I would by another film camera (but I have a closet full, so I have no need) But if I was getting into fine art or photography as a living, well film still has its place.
FWIW |
Some say that 7 megapixels closely matches 35 mm film, but I don't own a 7 megapixel camera so its hard to compare
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
c0ldfyr3
Andrew J Gurklies |
|
Posted:
Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:13 pm |
|
|
|
PRO BRONZE
Joined: 02 May 2004
Posts: 3014
Location: 127.0.0.1
|
Personally i have to go digital, simply because i have gottem to use the canon EOS-1Ds Mark II and the pictures came out ... WOW...But they retail for around $8,000 so i dont think i am going to be buying one soon, though i wouldn't mind having one for X-Mas or my 22 B-Day. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
