Options

Shooting on both film and digital

berhimwichberhimwich Registered Users Posts: 43 Big grins
edited July 18, 2004 in Cameras
After I got a scanner for my slides, negatives, and prints, I decided to get a film camera so I could continue using it. I started out shooting on film but then moved to digital for some of its practical advantages. But I have rediscovered many of the virtues of film. There are a wide variety of wonderful films to choose from. I enioy using very high speed films so I do not have to use flash; these films are even more sensitive to light than the NightShot mode on my Sony DSC-F828 and can pushed by two stops. Also, there are films which exaggerate saturation and contrast (though I won't deny these effects can be duplicated in Photoshop). Anyways, I think both ways of shooting are great and one should not be discounted over the other.

Thank you!
http://www.cy-ber.com/

Comments

  • Options
    dkappdkapp Registered Users Posts: 985 Major grins
    edited July 18, 2004
    berhimwich wrote:
    After I got a scanner for my slides, negatives, and prints, I decided to get a film camera so I could continue using it. I started out shooting on film but then moved to digital for some of its practical advantages. But I have rediscovered many of the virtues of film. There are a wide variety of wonderful films to choose from. I enioy using very high speed films so I do not have to use flash; these films are even more sensitive to light than the NightShot mode on my Sony DSC-F828 and can pushed by two stops. Also, there are films which exaggerate saturation and contrast (though I won't deny these effects can be duplicated in Photoshop). Anyways, I think both ways of shooting are great and one should not be discounted over the other.

    Thank you!

    I see a lot of people moving to digital. Some like to keep their film gear & shoot a few rolls. I grew up in the digital age and have never owned a film camera. I've been tossing around the idea of getting an old manual SLR, but I can't justify the cost of a new camera, film & development at this time. For me digital is cost effective. I like to shoot everything & delete later, film could get expensive.

    I've been looking at your site the past few days. You have a lot up there, and it covers everything. Keep shooting and sharing, I enjoy your pictures.

    Dave
    http://analog.lifekapptured.com (photoblog)
    http://www.lifekapptured.com (gallery)
  • Options
    berhimwichberhimwich Registered Users Posts: 43 Big grins
    edited July 18, 2004
    Good points
    I agree, film is not for everyone in the digital camera age. I started out using film, so you could say I have a bit of an emotional attachment to film cameras. That's not to say that I do not think some digital cameras won't become classics. If more all-manual digital cameras were made (like the Digilux 2) then I think you could have something that is legendary like the Pentax K1000 and not overly expensive.

    Film is definitely a more expensive route to go. Plus, if you want to share you photographs on Smugmug, you would either need a film scanner or a flat bed with film templates. Anyways, I think digital is wonderful and have been using it since 2000.

    Thanks!
    dkapp wrote:
    I see a lot of people moving to digital. Some like to keep their film gear & shoot a few rolls. I grew up in the digital age and have never owned a film camera. I've been tossing around the idea of getting an old manual SLR, but I can't justify the cost of a new camera, film & development at this time. For me digital is cost effective. I like to shoot everything & delete later, film could get expensive.

    I've been looking at your site the past few days. You have a lot up there, and it covers everything. Keep shooting and sharing, I enjoy your pictures.

    Dave
    http://www.cy-ber.com/
Sign In or Register to comment.