Reading mode: Light Dark

Interesting comparison of film vs. digital

Go to last post
The problem is defining 'better' and it is not anything to do with charts or tables and everything to do with your eyes

Lens data is the same, look at the noct data and look at the owner reverence and try to consolidate the two.

Anyone that used film ...correction anyone that developed film will know that the way a film image is deposited onto paper is a world apart from digital.

And so is the result ...and thats the point and the reason for debate, if they were the same why would anyone give a 'twig'.

People only debate the issue because they are both different and further we have a couple of generatons that have never even used it and shy away from family albums fo fear of seeing themselves naked in the bath ....or worse even, on a bear skin rug. The process of developing film is seen as archaic and akin to making your own furniture so you can sit down.

And my opinion has nothing to do with which is better, it is fact that I truly miss the image film produces and to replicate it using a sw filter is referred to as 'romantic' but to film users it is a little repulsive ...bit like kissing a robot

On the topic of robots ;: ....there is a field of study (Oh those Japanese) where a 'love' robot is seen to be desirable ....wonder what the data looks like, bet its as sexy as the MTF data for a noct.

So just like there are those that have never had 'interface' with film, so too will there be those that would prefer to kiss the robot.

...and I bet I got you with the title of this one :)

--
..

ɹǝpunɥɔ uǝɯ puɐ sʍoןɟ ɹǝǝq ǝɹǝɥʍ
ɹǝpun-uʍop puɐן ǝɥʇ ɯoɹɟ
..
 
exit here said:
The problem is defining 'better' and it is not anything to do with charts or tables and
everything to do with your eyes
Click to expand...
It is an interesting study, in a way. I think it mostly indicates that one's eyes might prefer studying the data over perusing the image itself. I'm sure somewhere there is a debate among painters as to whether oil produces a higher quality of work than acrylic. And I'm just as certain that someone is out there right now breaking down oil and acrylic bases to the molecular level to get at the truth of the matter. I'm sure in the end the conclusion will be that everyone is wrong, yet also right.
 
exit here said:
On the topic of robots ;: ....there is a field of study (Oh those Japanese) where a 'love' robot is seen to be desirable ...
Click to expand...
Seems Japs have a broken definition of 'love'.

PS: Thanks for showing me Unicode has upside-down latin characters :)

--
Jose
We live in a DX world
16-24 is wide, 30-40 is normal, 50-70 is for portraits
 
altproto said:
PS: Thanks for showing me Unicode has upside-down latin characters :)
Click to expand...
No, they just do that because I am below the equator, bit like the same as how water goes down the drain in the opposite direction to yours.

There is also the suggestion that because we are essentially walking on our heads, that Aussies are more evolved because of the greater supply of blood to the brain.

--
..

ɹǝpunɥɔ uǝɯ puɐ sʍoןɟ ɹǝǝq ǝɹǝɥʍ
ɹǝpun-uʍop puɐן ǝɥʇ ɯoɹɟ
..
 
Personal preference is what plays a huge part in this sort of debate. It does not matter what the figures say its how you perceive the result that puts you on one or other side of the fence. Somebody that has never worked with film and only knows Digital Images will most likely prefer Digital. You decide but Digital is here to stay and Film will continue but as a niche market.
Claude
 
This is just like the CD vs. Vinyl debate. Theoretically analog audio can sound better, but vinyl has a much lower dynamic range than CD. When presented with this fact, Vinyl fans will say "yeah, but vinyl has a 'warmth' to it and CDs sound cold."

Maybe - but it sounds like personal preference to me, with maybe a bit of nostalgia thrown in.
 
hayesk said:
This is just like the CD vs. Vinyl debate. Theoretically analog audio can sound better, but vinyl has a much lower dynamic range than CD. When presented with this fact, Vinyl fans will say "yeah, but vinyl has a 'warmth' to it and CDs sound cold."

Maybe - but it sounds like personal preference to me, with maybe a bit of nostalgia thrown in.
Click to expand...
Exactly, 'better' isn't only a function of graphs and numbers on a paper, the brain(and perhaps the Mind) take sooo many more incidental attributes and connections into it's creation of the infinitely flexible notion of 'better' . . .
--
David~
WSSA Member #90



. . . shoot like there's no film in the thing!
 
Of course, there is also the transistors vs valves (vacuum tubes) debate. Eventually film, vinyl records, and valves will only be found in history books and there'll be nobody around that actually remembers them.
--
Ken AD
 
I continue to use both and so am aware of their differences; it gives me more choice so I can opt for whatever medium I feel is best for the results I want to achieve.

Despite all the claims that certain software packages can reproduce the results from tradiional black and white films (and even colour pos/neg) those of us who use them know they haven't got there yet. The differences occur at the time of capture.

This summer when shooting at daytime events in bright sunshine my colour and mono negative films produced better results than my D90 (RAW files converted in NX2); in various other shooting conditions digital is my medium of choice.

As I get more proficient in using digital I enjoy what this medium has to offer and that includes the creative opportunites it offers me that I personally would not define as photography.

Objective studies are rare and film v digital ones are no exception. If people prefer the digital look that's fine; I for one am finding it excellent for some of my images and a poor second choice for others.

Lizzie
 
WineO said:
Personal preference is what plays a huge part in this sort of debate. It does not matter what the figures say its how you perceive the result that puts you on one or other side of the fence. Somebody that has never worked with film and only knows Digital Images will most likely prefer Digital. You decide but Digital is here to stay and Film will continue but as a niche market.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think I'm coming to that conclusion, too. We can run around comparing spec sheets all day, but in the end, it's the "image look" that matters.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Rule of Thirds is meant to be broken, but only 1/3
of the time.



D80/D90 gallery: http://esfotoclix.com
Photo blog: http://esfotoclix.com/blog1
 
lizzie b said:
This summer when shooting at daytime events in bright sunshine my colour and mono negative films produced better results than my D90 (RAW files converted in NX2); in various other shooting conditions digital is my medium of choice.
Click to expand...
I'd love to see some side-by-sides so I can gain a greater appreciation... I take it you develop your own film?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Rule of Thirds is meant to be broken, but only 1/3
of the time.



D80/D90 gallery: http://esfotoclix.com
Photo blog: http://esfotoclix.com/blog1
 
Supr X said:
hayesk said:
This is just like the CD vs. Vinyl debate. Theoretically analog audio can sound better, but vinyl has a much lower dynamic range than CD. When presented with this fact, Vinyl fans will say "yeah, but vinyl has a 'warmth' to it and CDs sound cold."

Maybe - but it sounds like personal preference to me, with maybe a bit of nostalgia thrown in.
Click to expand...
Exactly, 'better' isn't only a function of graphs and numbers on a paper, the brain(and perhaps the Mind) take sooo many more incidental attributes and connections into it's creation of the infinitely flexible notion of 'better' . . .
Click to expand...
I think the point made earlier in this thread about preference, grown over years of use of film, has more to do it than anything else. Once people get used to the film aesthetic and set it as their standard, everything else will look inferior. The fact that earlier digital photographs were indeed inferior to film in the technical (specs) sense doesn't help. I went through something similar when comparing the output of my D80 to my D90. I could have sworn the D80's output was better, only to realize that it was less accurate and in fact technically inferior. That didn't matter in that initial impression, though. Over a year of shooting with my D80, I had developed a preference. I can only imagine what decades of shooting with Fuji Velvia or Ektachrome would do. Digital may be more accurate, but image quality has more to do with aesthetics than specs and data sheets.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Rule of Thirds is meant to be broken, but only 1/3
of the time.



D80/D90 gallery: http://esfotoclix.com
Photo blog: http://esfotoclix.com/blog1
 
It is interesting enough, but I really do not see much of a point except for academic curiosity. We use what we prefer and the advantages of digital work flow over traditional are just enormous.

Besides, with Photoshop I can have a picture of me dunking on Obama, lets see ya try that with scissors and tape.
 
Ken AD said:
Of course, there is also the transistors vs valves (vacuum tubes) debate. Eventually film, vinyl records, and valves will only be found in history books and there'll be nobody around that actually remembers them.
Click to expand...
Actually the trend in guitar ampifiers is back to tubes for the analog sound quality. If it were not for the huge pratical disadvantages I would prefer film before digital in many cases (not all). Image quality is so much more than just resolution and low noise.
Ken AD said:
--
Ken AD
Click to expand...
--
http://dslr-video.com/blogmag/
 
Yesterday I happened to stumble into a hospital waiting room (surgical at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston) which has a collection of prints hanging on the walls that were given to the hospital by the great portrait photographer Yousuf Karsh.....

you might be familiar with his work: here is his portrait of Churchill courtesey of my D40.....

spend 5 minutes in front of these portraits and maybe the "sharpness" of digital will not seem so important anymore.....

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top