I think Thom was right, again...

Started Mar 26, 2013 | Discussions thread
Mahmoud Mousef
Senior MemberPosts: 2,157
Like?
film = instant gratifiction gone, not just wallet
In reply to PHXAZCRAIG, Mar 27, 2013

PHXAZCRAIG wrote:

Some time ago Thom Hogan posted that digital might not actually be cheaper than film, because you end up buying new bodies so often.     I'm starting to agree with him, even though I shoot far more digital shots than film.

Have not read the article, but a few things come to mind:

~~~~~

I wouldn't give up the convenience and instant nature of digital for all the film cameras in the world. 

Ability to instantly review and make use of your images (ie.send them to others) without long-winded self-processing, scanning or third party involvement is priceless in itself, without even talking about price of film and processing. It has truly been freed with digital, and am still in awe of what we have.

Only a small percentage of enthusaists buy multiple digital bodies, and even then I'd argue film costs would be far higher if today's emancipated digital shooters shot as much film as they do digital (quite aside from tremendous convenience and time-saving aspects).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
Duh!New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow