chobit

I don't think you quite understand what I was saying.

I have already mentioned, the comparison of auto/stick vs digital/film isn't quite right.  There are essential things that you can't do with AT.  But DSLRs can performance most if not all essential things films can.

There are many traditional photographer who still prefer films rather than digital.  Some simplely aren't willing to change, while some may be computer/technology dummies.  If one is willing to learn basic digital darkroom along with DSLR with basic oomputer knowledge, I still think digitals are better alternative to learn than films..!

Also, professionl films are very expensive..!  One of my favorite film Kodak Portra is $8.50 a roll of 36.
Printing at ABC Photos is $17.50 1 Day service or $22.60 Pro Service.  You will be spending $0.86 a photo.

Let say you are going to learn how to shoot a wedding for free. 1000 shots is not uncommon for digital, 1000 shots on film base on $.86 a pic = $860-

I took 11000 pics excluding my paid wedding jobs in 2005.  Just to give you an idea..!

Bottom line, photography is a very expensive hobby in the old days, but it can be much cheaper now with digital.  So, I see very little reasons to go back to film unless you enjoy doing so personally, or on client requests.

Just my 2 cents.

原帖由 Ultraman 於 2008-1-30 22:23 發表
No matter manual car or auto car, you can drive from point A to point B. And no matter film or digital camera, you can take pictures with it. Then what's the difference? My point is, if you really lov ...

[ 本帖最後由 chobit 於 2008-1-31 14:21 編輯 ]

AmericanBeauty

Even thought digital photographer does not require film, other equipment can still be expensive. >_<  All the lights and lesns I have add up to a lot of money!  Light stands, reflectors, power pack, grids, backup equipment.......  The cost of film is very minimal compare to the money a photographer have to spend on other things.  Photography is an expensive thing to do if you want to go all out, same for any other hoobies.

Even though I'm forced to use digital because that's the general trend, I still think film have its value.  There is nothing more satisfying then enlarging a big black and write print in a darkroom!

[ 本帖最後由 AmericanBeauty 於 2008-2-2 08:53 編輯 ]

Ultraman

原帖由 chobit 於 2008-1-31 14:15 發表
I don't think you quite understand what I was saying.

I have already mentioned, the comparison of auto/stick vs digital/film isn't quite right.  There are essential things that you can't do with AT.  ...

May I say, you don't quite understand what I was saying too? (hehe....)
I was not comparing the technical issue between film and digital cameras la. I was saying the "feeling" and stuff like that mah. To shoot in digital is the trend and need, to shoot in film is another kind of enjoyment which digital can't be replaced. Just like driving (my not-too-appropriate example... maybe), only true lovers would prefer to drive manual.

I don't think shooting digital is any cheaper than shooting film. Just talking about the first investment- the camera body, how much is a manual (or AF) film camera and how much is a digital camera (relevant level)? Lenses and accessories (such as flash) could be at similar prices. I can shoot with my manual film camera for 10+ years, but can a digital camera last for 10+ years? For example, I can take millions and millions clicks on my manual camera, but digital cameras have "countable lives"! You have to change new body from time to time, unless you're not using it often. And then photo lab prices for film processing & developing didn't raise much for the past years. But you need a set of good enough computer system and software at home at your own cost, that need to be upgraded from time to time too! Another "cost" is labor. You paid a reasonable price for film printing service, but you need to do your own PS (or any kind of pp) at home! Unless you do it for leisure, but every minute you spend on it does count in running business ga wor! Result, cost of digital photography is not any cheaper than film photography but is more expensive la!

chobit

原帖由 Ultraman 於 2008-2-2 11:55 發表

May I say, you don't quite understand what I was saying too? (hehe....)
I was not comparing the technical issue between film and digital cameras la. I was saying the "feeling" and stuff like that mah ...

Well...., I can't denial the feeling of shooting films can be so awesome, the part where you don't get to see what you have shot until hours or days later, make you so looking forward to the results.  But then again, for a beginner, digital is the way to go, and I am sure they can learn as well, if not better than shooting films.  There are more Pro with digital than Con if given the person already know some computers stuffs..!

PS:  I suppose 1 of the feeling people have toward driving stick over AT, is the extra degree of control you can have over the car  (what about u?)  Well, I don't see how film cameras has such benefit over digital.  I can see that any SLR/DSLR has such benefit over point & shoots.  You do see my posts about how I usually not recommend p&s or advance p&s over SLR/DSLR for serious learners.

CB

chobit

Oh yeah..no kidding..!  My 1DsM2 冰山一角 when comparing to how much more I have spent on my other camera stuffs..!  Sad.., but true.. =(

原帖由 AmericanBeauty 於 2008-2-2 08:50 發表
Even thought digital photographer does not require film, other equipment can still be expensive. >_<  All the lights and lesns I have add up to a lot of money!  Light stands, reflectors, power pack, g ...

Ultraman

原帖由 chobit 於 2008-2-2 12:58 發表

Well, I don't see how film cameras has such benefit over digital. ...

In film photography, you can play with various of media such as color slide, b/w slide, color negative, b/w negative, IR film... and more; use various shooting skills such as multiple exposure; together with various darkroom techniques such as push film, cross processing, burning & dodging, halfway exposure.... and more. And sometimes you gotta be a "painter", for you need to use paint and brush to touch up all the dust on the prints for the final procedure.  
In digital world, you don't need to use different shooting skills to shoot slide or negative, color or b/w, or even IR, just use computer to do all the job afterwards. "Multiple exposure"? You don't need to have the desire image in mind when you shoot, you just go home and check your stock, put anything together up to your preference anytime after. You also don't need to shake your film can and don't need to count your stopwatch for processing, no need to make up your own handy dodging pads in different sizes or make cardboards with holes in different sizes for burning and dodging..., all you need to do is to click some other buttons on your computer. Dust touch ups? That is not the final part of the production line though, you just click on another button on your computer way before you do burning & dodging tim.  

I had been using film for years, and I quit using it and now only use digital. As I said, digital is the most efficient and most convenient way nowadays. Yet, film photography is the most enjoyable photography. And actually, except for the shooting part, all the post processing in digital world can't really called part of photography, they're only computer enhancement or animation la. To be more precise, that's not really related to "photography" tim la.

Now you think film photography and digital photography is pretty much the same?? Or after you read thru all the above facts, would you have any other thoughts?

chobit

Don't get me wrong.  Like I said, I am not trying to get into the digital vs film war.  I am looking at this in a small area.  Photography for beginner, who has little experience with SLR.  Then DSLR seems to have more beneifit over film at this time.

If we are starting to look into other area of photography such as B&W, Slides or darkroom, then there will be much more to look at as well.

Here are what some photographers think years ago about the changes

Go medium of large format, 35mm is a joke

Auto Focus cameras are for amateur photographers, but not for the pro/experience photographers

Spot meter is a must.  Flash shouldn't be use in TTL mode, but Manual

If you think about it, many of above help photographers to think more before they shoot, but it wouldn't mean we have to go back to such manual way to shoot, non does it make us less photographer than the past..!

Photography is an art which has been evolve quite a bit, but for us the photographer.  It's the matter of capturing what we want to some kind of media... rather it is digital form or ... other...



I honestly, I don't think there are many beginner (including those that go to school for photograph) would start out with slides or b&w slides or darkroom.  There is enough to learn on getting correct exposure, using filters, shutter/aperture effects, focal length, composition, etc..!  Then one who manage this well can start looking into doing other photography related stuffs such as IR.  Then, they can always buy a cheap SLR+some IR film.

While I wouldn't say IR & B&W  

原帖由 Ultraman 於 2008-2-2 15:42 發表

In film photography, you can play with various of media such as color slide, b/w slide, color negative, b/w negative, IR film... and more; use various shooting skills such as multiple exposure; toget ...

maanmo

i remember looking at the vancouver community college photography course calender about 2 years ago
most of their courses are on film technolgoy

however , we are going through a revolution in photography ,
film techniques today are simply just  for the specialized artist

if you want to learn to make a living in photography, everything is or will be digital
  if you want to learn photography as a hobby,
  all you need is a camera with manual control, a wide range of zoom, and the digital dark room
  ( film is just no longer practical for most people )
further, i am of the opinion that , today's DSLR are simply not designed for the those who started in digital
today's DSLR are designed to meet the needs of the old hands who used film before
if you have never used film before , you dont need today's DSLR
may be 2 years more of innovation, then may be

there is a road side ad by OLympus
" you just bought a canon digital SLR ? too bad "
i agree with olympus

[ 本帖最後由 maanmo 於 2008-2-2 17:26 編輯 ]

Ultraman

原帖由 chobit 於 2008-2-2 17:07 發表
Don't get me wrong.  Like I said, I am not trying to get into the digital vs film war.  I am looking at this in a small area.  Photography for beginner, who has little experience with SLR.  Then DSLR  ...

Hey, I think actually we agree in some points.
And what you said this time is truly correct! Which is the point I keep pointing out..... all those "inconvenience" in film photography is exactly the "spirit of photography" lor!! To learn the easiest way to enter the photography door is surely digital; yet you can't really get the "spirit".

chobit

Case close haha =D

原帖由 Ultraman 於 2008-2-2 19:31 發表

Hey, I think actually we agree in some points.
And what you said this time is truly correct! Which is the point I keep pointing out..... all those "inconvenience" in film photography is exactly the  ...