Film is coming back...

RafVal said:

dutch painters used cameras to project there subjects onto their
canvas, obviously they didnt have film or digital backs 400 years ago
so they painted the image instead

Click to expand...

Yes

Of course but to suggest that they would have used a film or digital as a final image is a false argument. The use of the camera obscura by painters was in order to obtain better perspective in their paintings, to suggest that they would have dumped painting to take up photography is an absurd argument.

Of course when photography arrived many people had photos taken rather than portraits painted, but there was no on mass dropping of paint as a medium by artists rushing to take up photography.

What did happen is that artists became much more surreal in their use of colour and form and art itself changed, but there are still painters around today!
By your argument they are going to give up and use Abobe illustrator instead!
I think paint will survive the digital onslaught
Mark

--
http://www.photo-utopia.blogspot.com/

ewelch said:

The bottom line, if you don't trust technology, don't expect us to
"trust" your opinion of it. :-D

Click to expand...

I think that pretty much sums up the whole debate in a very succint way

Film is a wonderful way of creating images that we have used for about a 100 years, but now a new technogy has evolved. In just about five to ten years almost all professional photographers, serious hobbyists and casual vacation shooters have discovered the immense advantages if the digital workflow. But as always during a technological transition, a handful of people completely fail to understand the new technology, and therefore refuse to to cope with the changes. And others does understand the new technology perfectly well, but still prefer the old technology because they happen to like it.

Film will not go away, it has its uses, its own artistic expression and for many people the process of creating images in a darkroom with chemicals will always have a distinct magic about it. But to belive that film in any way will compete for market share with digital photography ... That is just plain silly ;-)

artists became more abstract sure, but thats because the ones that didnt became photographers and we dont call them artists, the fact is that more images are done by photographers then p[ainters these days, even if it was only for reasons of economy, and yes, I think most art will be done using computers, much of what you see now already is, of course there will always be some painters, but go to any media, books, magazines internet etc, very few paintings, admittedly largely because it takes a lot more time to do a painting so they cost more

Mark Smith said:

RafVal said:

dutch painters used cameras to project there subjects onto their
canvas, obviously they didnt have film or digital backs 400 years ago
so they painted the image instead

Click to expand...

Yes
Of course but to suggest that they would have used a film or digital
as a final image is a false argument. The use of the camera obscura
by painters was in order to obtain better perspective in their
paintings, to suggest that they would have dumped painting to take up
photography is an absurd argument.
Of course when photography arrived many people had photos taken
rather than portraits painted, but there was no on mass dropping of
paint as a medium by artists rushing to take up photography.
What did happen is that artists became much more surreal in their use
of colour and form and art itself changed, but there are still
painters around today!
By your argument they are going to give up and use Abobe illustrator
instead!
I think paint will survive the digital onslaught
Mark

--
http://www.photo-utopia.blogspot.com/

Click to expand...

--
http://www.rafval.com

agreed, just saying that, in some instances, in terms of intent and results paint could be included with film/digital

http://www.rafval.com

Mark Smith said:

RafVal said:

yes it does, its just a different medium, many of those early
painters had invented cameras but they didnt have a medium to hold
the image so they painted it instead, they would have been shooting
digital if they had had it
--

Click to expand...

Thats rubbish name one early painter that invented a camera?
People paint pictures for a host of different reasons to pair down
the argument to if painters had cameras they would use them rather
than paint is a ridiculous argument.
They are a different medium totally- which is why some still paint
today!

Click to expand...

DaVinci? Not sure about that, but I believe so, but he sure wasn't your average artist.

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

Next year...they will have cameras you have to rub two sticks together to make it work....

Ever see the diesel powerd D3X they have in the works???

Heard the new Canon will be Bio_Diesel...

Sorry couldnt resist.

Roman
--
What will I be given today, and will I be open to see it?
Minor White
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

An Iraqi Muslim scientist named Abu Ali Al-Hasan Ibn al-Haitham (965-1039 CE), known in the West as Alhacen, is credited with the discovery of the camera obscura while carrying out practical experiments on optics in his Book of Optics
Many early artists used a Camera Obscura to practice drawing and painting.

CharlieDIY said:

Mark Smith said:

RafVal said:

yes it does, its just a different medium, many of those early
painters had invented cameras but they didnt have a medium to hold
the image so they painted it instead, they would have been shooting
digital if they had had it
--

Click to expand...

Thats rubbish name one early painter that invented a camera?
People paint pictures for a host of different reasons to pair down
the argument to if painters had cameras they would use them rather
than paint is a ridiculous argument.
They are a different medium totally- which is why some still paint
today!

Click to expand...

DaVinci? Not sure about that, but I believe so, but he sure wasn't
your average artist.

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

Click to expand...

--
Chris, Broussard, LA

sinwen said:

You are probably right for your part of the world and it is
interesting to see the differences. Here I can tell you I didn't hear
much of people ordering CD when they discharge their cards.

Click to expand...

Out of companies operating in France, CeWe is the largest single one with ca. 40% market share.

DFM machines are installed as standard in all stores that deal with CeWe, and they drop the contents of a memory card as standard (included in the standard fee).

At least that's the way Cewe deals in Germany, Poland, and all of Eastern Europe, I don't think why it would be different in France.

I work with computers, and I tell people - think of a computer as a power tool. You can cut a piece of wood with a handsaw, or shave a board with a plane. But a power saw, power planer or router can do a heck of a lot more and a lot faster.

OTOH, a power tool can make a bigger mess and destroy something beyond repair a lot faster if you don't know what you're doing.

Hence, the same for a computer vs. a typewriter or vs. sorting index cards. Your output looks a lot nicer and edits faster, but how many people accidentally delete the whole document when using a typewriter? (Except for the joke about the new secretary at the shredder asking "where do the copies come out?")

So too with digital cameras. Sheer power and volume does not make up for lack of skill. I suppose one benefit of volume - how many outstanding photos were as much skill as a happy coincidence of catching the motion or facial expression at just the exact instant? That's easier to do with digital and falls into the "power tool" analogy. But composition, persuasion, and all the other skills a good photographer needs - digital doesn't do those automatically.

As for post-processing - I've done colour printing with negatives and those CMY filters (not even the dial wheels) and retouching and manipulation is so much easier with digital and computers. Digital makes it easier to rescue problem pictures; I've done pushing and dodging with chemicals and paper years ago, and it's so much easier with a computer.

bogeyman said:

There is no guarantee that digital files stored on magnetic or
optical media will be readable 50 years from now

Click to expand...

I can guarantee that they won't be. Back in 1995, I used a number of 100MB Zip disks to extend the limited hard drive space on my computer. The disks are uniformly unreadable now, but the data isn't lost: in 1998, when I purchased a new computer, I copied the contents of the disks onto the 12GB hard drive; in 2002, when I purchased my current computer, I copied the disk over to one of the 60GB drives in the new system, and in 2006, when I installed a 200GB replacement, the contents of the old drive were copied over. The files on the original 100MB disks are still there, and as readable as ever.

Digital media may not last very long, but copying is cheap, easy, and error-free. You can't say the same about film.

A friend of mine worked in the Engineering department of his company. He had access to tehir scanenr and a giant inkjet; before afamily reunion he printed a copy of the family, assembled, from an 8x12 from 50 years earlier; as a 3x5 foot poster.

He said some of the old-timers cried; with their failing eyesight, it had been decades since they had been able to see pictures of long-gone relatives in that much detail.

I suppose this is a tribute to two technologies - firstly, fim; the amount of detail in one picture is probably a result of large-format film and quality cameras (I'm guessing 120 or better film). Secondly, digital technology made it affordable (or free, in his case, ha ha) to reproduce prints in sizes nobody could have dreamt of long ago.

I agree to your point. There is still room for film. If some manufacturer created an innovative film and printer that can easily develop pictures from the film, some people will go for such a new method over the current digital photography,

optical_illusion said:

I agree to your point. There is still room for film.

Click to expand...

I probably shouldn't be beating this dead horse... but film is dead.

True, you can still find a few folks who swear vinyl records are better than compact disks.... and someone will tell you his Sony Betamax can out perform a DVD player.... but this debate has long been settled.

Anyone who shoots film today is just doing it out of a sense of nostalgia. Like folks who bake their own bread.... or build their own furniture.

Digital imaging isn't a passing fad. It's here to stay. Every year digital cameras get better and cheaper, memory cards get bigger and cheaper, and the format keeps expanding. Today, medium format is going digital.

Ask yourself.... when was the LAST TIME anyone introduced a new film or a new film camera? Meanwhile, 100% of the R&D money is being spent on digital imaging.

And for good reasons.
--
Marty
Panasonic FZ20,
Panasonic FZ7,
Olympus C7000,
Leica M3

Marty4650 said:

optical_illusion said:

I agree to your point. There is still room for film.

Click to expand...

I probably shouldn't be beating this dead horse... but film is dead.

True, you can still find a few folks who swear vinyl records are
better than compact disks.... and someone will tell you his Sony
Betamax can out perform a DVD player.... but this debate has long
been settled.

Anyone who shoots film today is just doing it out of a sense of
nostalgia. Like folks who bake their own bread.... or build their own
furniture.

Digital imaging isn't a passing fad. It's here to stay. Every year
digital cameras get better and cheaper, memory cards get bigger and
cheaper, and the format keeps expanding. Today, medium format is
going digital.

Ask yourself.... when was the LAST TIME anyone introduced a new film
or a new film camera? Meanwhile, 100% of the R&D money is being spent
on digital imaging.

And for good reasons.
--
Marty
Panasonic FZ20,
Panasonic FZ7,
Olympus C7000,
Leica M3

Click to expand...

But his songs keep on rocking!!!!

;-)

--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)

It seems you missed the OP's point. He and I were talking about storage stability. Digital is handy, to be sure, but if the data are lost, it's meaningless. It is why the OP thinks "film is back." Besides, some film cameras can work without battery, which is appreciated by those who go on adventure travels. Thus there is still room for film.

If you only weight on these 2 pts I think digital is definitely NOT losing out!

Digital files - you can have the exact image stored in multiple locations at the same time - dust free, scratches free, finger print free. You can move them to a new media (CD to DVD to blue ray, etc) over time. Remote server on the net - it's everywhere. You can't beat that. They are also relatively cheaper to archive than film. Color negatives do deteriorate over time even stored in a cool place. Not everybody shot everything on Kodakchrome.

If you are on a semi long journey that you think you are gonna run out of battery, I think there's also a equal chance that your exposed film would degrade in color by being cooked for weeks before processed. Not to mention X-ray and other hassles overseas. If you shoot 2000 images that is 56 rolls of film to carry. With that space and weight I rather just get some extra rechargeable AA's.

optical_illusion said:

It seems you missed the OP's point. He and I were talking about
storage stability. Digital is handy, to be sure, but if the data are
lost, it's meaningless. It is why the OP thinks "film is back."
Besides, some film cameras can work without battery, which is
appreciated by those who go on adventure travels. Thus there is still
room for film.

Click to expand...

--

Is a bargain basement for buyers..

I bought an X300 and 50mm lens for £15 recently..how bad eh? Even top line and semi pro models and up are selling for very good prices.

Not to mention those excellent MD lenses, that sell for almost nothing too...(and with an adaptor..I can put them on digital)

Sure film costs...but its fun to use these cameras, and get back to the real meat of photography..not digging about with menus..its you, the camera, a 50mm and some film...go and create something ...love it...

Your mind is free to worry about composition...
--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)