bossnas: Those people fortunate enough to get their photographs replaced were only able to because they had prints in the first place. The importance of a print cannot be overemphasised. If an image is important to you, print it. Nuff said.
Most of the victims of the Tsunami were lucky enough to escape alive with the clothes on their back. A USB stick, memory card or cloud storage is all going to be really handy after the Tsunami wiped out your house and everything in it.
Those people fortunate enough to get their photographs replaced were only able to because they had prints in the first place. The importance of a print cannot be overemphasised. If an image is important to you, print it. Nuff said.
You can spend £2k+ on a DSLR and you still can't get a print in your hand without additional equipment. These guys are on to something!
What are the clone/healing tools like? I just want an app that will be good for spotting the odd bit of dust from film scans and I certainly don't want to be paying Adobe a monthly subscription for that. Thanks.
bossnas: To all of the people that claim digital photography is so cheap, did your computer, software and hard-drives for backing up all come free with the camera? If they did, tell me where I too can get them. Thanks.
That sounds great. 50,000 photos on a 1TB drive that will last a lifetime. Fantastic value. I'm sure my grandkids will have fun trawling through that lot 50 years from now when they're still using the same digital camera I use today. You're right, digital photography really is cheap so that must mean it's the best way to make images. Cheaper = better? Thanks for explaining it so well.
To all of the people that claim digital photography is so cheap, did your computer, software and hard-drives for backing up all come free with the camera? If they did, tell me where I too can get them. Thanks.
I'm curious, when did you last visit a photography exhibition? How was the photography displayed? On computer monitors? Or was it prints hanging on a wall?
Did you print any of these images to compare them as photographs?
Pure photography? LOL! Digital photography more like.
Pure photography is using light sensitive materials that you can hold in your hand, cameras that don't need batteries to function. That's taking things back to the root of the invention of photography, pure photography. Making images without the need of a computer, making prints without the need of a printer or inks. That's pure photography!
When people ask me why I shoot film I tell them it's for many reasons but the main one being the amazing variety of beautifully designed cameras and different formats. This guy obviously knows all about that.
bossnas: I'm so glad I went back to shooting on film. I don't need a subscription to any software to make prints in the darkroom or to make scans.
I've got freezers full of film so I don't have monthly expenses. The chemicals for processing costs me pennies per roll. I've probably spent less on film than I did on my D700 when it came out. My scanner came with Silverfast but I don't need to pay a subscription to use that. I save my scans as TIFF.
I'm so glad I went back to shooting on film. I don't need a subscription to any software to make prints in the darkroom or to make scans.
Camediadude: Please, for the love of mercy, no more about facebook...
No. All content uploaded to FB gives them the right to do whatever they want with it. It's in their T&C's. That's why I don't upload there. Problem solved.
ryansholl: Of all the news to place on the homepage of Digital Photography Review, what is chosen is about a photo taken on film.
All this talk of megapixels is totally missing the point. The beauty of using film goes way beyond megapixels. If you love the look of film and the tactile experience of using it and the HUGE variety of cameras and formats to choose from then there isn't a digital camera on the planet that can compete. Faking the look of film with software is just that, fake.
I prefer to ask permission and have a brief chat with my subject when I'm doing street photography. It's more interesting for me. I've found people usually either flattered or curious about why I want to photograph them. It might be because I like to use old film cameras but I get way more people agreeing than I get rejections.
Take a look: http://www.simplyoxford.com
I only shoot one single frame and then move on. No one gets hassled or feels their privacy invaded by the paparazzi.