Reading mode: Light Dark

Don't hate the film noob

Go to last post
Lol, I think you have misunderstood me. I am all for going digital all the way. I have done film in the darkroom' but will never go back to it at all. Digital is the way forward.

Sensor technology has improved vastly in recent years and will definitely continue to advance such that there's really no point to do the old analog film stuff other than for nostalgic reasons. For most, it will largely be a waste of time and resources if one thinks along the line that film is superior to digital, which it is not.
 
The M403 is the grenade launcher mounted under the M4 assault rifle.
 
Then we are 100% in agreement which must be the first time two folk have been in this thread. :-O

I was just a little bit confused by what you wrote. Was it tongue in cheek?
Dave
 
Regardless it puts a negative slant on what could be an interesting and informative discussion. Wouldn't it be better to keep it civil and kindly point out how the person is mistaken. It's a sad testimony on our society and is why disgusting people like Donald Trump can insult their way to a Presidential nomination.
 
My main pet peeves are over saturated colors and excessive sharpening.
 
I agree with you because you admitted the scans will look different. I never meant they looked bad.
 
The Davinator said:
The Davinator wrotee:

... A good scan will preserve what's been recorded on film without issue...
Click to expand...
I have always thought that the film grains on a negative has a unique nature and characteristics which no other medium can duplicate. I had thought that scanning is in effect converting these analog characteristics to digital, which is not unlike a DAC in audio. The only way to benefit from the subtle qualities of the film grains is to transfer the image to paper via an old-time enlarger.

Am I mistaken in my belief? Hope you can en!ighten.
 
How can you possibly know you've shot more film types than anybody on DPR? Did you take a survey?
 
davesurrey said:
Then we are 100% in agreement which must be the first time two folk have been in this thread. :-O

I was just a little bit confused by what you wrote. Was it tongue in cheek?
Dave
Click to expand...
I am serious that digital is the way forward.

Those who belittle or scoff at technological advances are living in the past. In photography, the most important development has been in sensor technology, which is till ongoing, and that is why the future is even more exciting.

As a clarification about what I wrote earlier, my view is that if one chooses to go the film way for whatever reason, one must go analog all the way, otherwise it will be counter productive. Scanning is digitizing, and does not do justice to the subtle qualities the film grains are capable of giving via the analog process.

--
http://singaporegallery.com : Sightseeing Without Hassle
 
Last edited:
Les Berkley said:
Evidence please?
Click to expand...
Obviously I can't supply evidence here but I did scan a couple thousand slides and negatives I took over 40 years. No matter how hard I tried I couldn't quite match the look of the original. They looked good but not the same. Maybe it was my fault, I don't know but I do know enough about analog to digital conversion to understand that the scanner and software by necessity adds some unique characteristics.
 
Scanning preserves the nature of the grain faithfully. Preserving the color exactly is another thing.
 
Well I'd agree that technology has given us major benefits in the whole photographic process and if I were honest I'd admit that I only ever get my film cameras out to shoot these days (mainly MF) for nostalgic reasons. Just don't tell anyone.

But I'm glad I digitised my 35mm slide, negatives and even my prints where I'd lost the negatives. I took great care and time but it was worth it as instead of them languishing in boxes upstairs I now can view then at ease on my PC. I guess I'd say that the best images are the ones that you get to look at.

I can hear the purists throffing at the mouth as I type. :-)
 
Last edited:
davesurrey said:
Yes, I agree again. I only ever get my film cameras out to shoot these days (mainly MF) for nostalgic reasons. Sad, I know. :-)
Click to expand...
Talking about nostalgia, I will be delighted to get a roll of film for my Yashica MAT-124G TLR camera, if only for old times sake. :-)
 
hdr said:
I have always thought that the film grains on a negative has a unique nature and characteristics which no other medium can duplicate. I had thought that scanning is in effect converting these analog characteristics to digital, which is not unlike a DAC in audio. The only way to benefit from the subtle qualities of the film grains is to transfer the image to paper via an old-time enlarger.

Am I mistaken in my belief? Hope you can en!ighten.
Click to expand...
I suppose it depends on the resolution of your scan. Higher resolution scans may resolve more of the film grain, at the expense of huge output TIFF files. Eventually you hit the law of diminishing returns.

In my film experience, the glamour of film grain wears off quickly. Grain works best when it suggests detail and texture, but only when it is not particularly noticable as grain itself: unless you are going for a spontaneous, gritty effect.
 
Actually the best film scans I've seen are from B&W negatives. Many of them are fantastic. In many ways nothing beats B&W film. The very high DR of a B&W negative can't be matched in digital.

--
Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels
------------
Misuse of the ability to do 100% pixel peeping is the bane of digital photography.
 
Last edited:
Your B&W scans look great, especially the first one. The DR of B&W negative film can't be matched with digital unless you use bracketing.
 
Plenty of 120 stock in my fridge for my Bronica ETRSi. I sold my Fuji GSW690 iii some months ago so only have 9 film cameras left!

As they say...nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
How to? A digital equivalent of a film "contact sheet"
Replies
8
Views
20K
PMB
P
K
Blogging With Film
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
10K
p_anotherguy
P
K
  • Question Question
Pentax or Minolta film SLR recommendations?
2
Replies
29
Views
13K
cathal gantly
C
flektogon
  • Question Question
How good film do I need?
2
Replies
27
Views
4K
flektogon
flektogon
flektogon
  • Photo Photo
Finally I've got them...
Replies
12
Views
931
flektogon
flektogon

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