Film Vs Digital (not the usual question)

Started Sep 4, 2013 | Discussions thread
MoreorLess Veteran Member • Posts: 4,453
Re: Film Vs Digital (not the usual question)

cmc1 wrote:

Personal opinion (I'll state that first before keyboard gangsters attack)

I feel at lot of images posted on-line now are over processed and not a true reflection of the Camera users true skills, abilities or passion for photography.

I am not from the analogue era myself but I know a few people who were trained using film and appear to be far better photographers for it.

I would be interested to know what widely used techniques were used for processing and what are their modern equivalents?

Also, wouldn't it be good if there were modern software that limited digital post processing to the same level as film?

It's great to see "straight out the camera, no PP" on posted images

Post processing was pretty widely used in the days of film, especially for adjustments to brightness and contrast(either locally or over the whole image) but its greater difficulty and cost ment it was generally carried out by higher level photographers.

Really I think the difference comes down to your mindset, if you want to half ass things and take the easy route digital will let you get away with things a bit more but the result still won't be great. If on the other hand your prepaired to put the effort in I think digital is a powerful learning tool allowing you to devolp skills much more quickly than film.

Seems to be too many people this days believe that "going back to film" is automatically going to make them a better photographer, it might give a bit of an ego boost but results wise if you couldn't put the effort in with digital your results with film will likely be no better.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow