Film vs. Digital - kicking a dead horse...

[inigo guionnet]

Will it ever come? Is there a demand? Are their other digital
work-arounds for the result I'm postulating?
Probably an X-Pan type of solution as the imager would be smaller
and more affordable than anything as large as an actual 6x17.
Just dreaming and tired of film processor scratches.
Meanwhile, stitching can be fun, but I do not like the curvature.
Best,
Robert

 

[Art Rosch]

This thread's too big, so if someone's mentioned this, let me do it
again. I use film for my fifteen minute astrophoto exposures. I've

seen the D60 come pretty close, but not quite. There still isn't a consumer digicam that can cut this admittedly specialized form
of photography. but other than for astrophotos, my film stuff
gathers dust.

my website: http://www.artsdigitalphoto.com

Art

 

[andyfrazer]

The production cost of a perfect full frame 35mm CCD will be at least 6
time that of a Pentium 4.

Probably correct. That's why the EOS 1Ds is going to cost over $5000.

A MF size CCD will always beyond most people's budget.

That's true, if you believe that continual improvements to semiconductor manufacturing technology will come to grinding halt, transistor device sizes will stop getting smaller, and the demand for cheaper-and-better consumer electronics will just suddenly stop.

Andy Frazer
My website -> http://www.gorillasites.com
Please comment on this one -> http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=229781

 

[andyfrazer]

The expensiveness of medium format, and the rarity of such
cameras, shows that only a tiny number of photographers are willing
to pay for resolution that exceeds 35mm.

I agree on that point. It's possible that the demand for a
35mm-size camera with a sensor beyond 11MP may drop off. But like
everything else with personal computers, we're always proven wrong
and the demand does seem to magically re-appear.

The reason why we need faster computers is because Microsoft
Outlook runs so slow! And every time Intel comes out with a faster
microprocessor, Microsoft just adds a few million more lines of
code to Microsoft Outlook and to Visual Basic and then everything
runs slow again.

The need for faster and faster computers began a long time before MicroSoft (or even Bill Gates) was even born.

With imaging, the need for resolution isn't increasing.

You're joking, right?

Are magazines getting bigger? Are newspapers getting bigger? Are
advertising materials getting bigger? No. No. No.

Do all digital photographs go into magazines and newspapers? No. No. No.

Once digital has enough resolution to satisfy the biggest commercial
markets for photography, the only need for more resolution is fine
art, a very tiny market.

That reminds me of just when IBM was being formed, one of the founders said that the entire world needs at most ten or twelve computers (apologies for the misquote...I can't remember his exact words).

Andy Frazer
My website -> http://www.gorillasites.com
Please comment on this one -> http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=229781

 

[andyfrazer]

More 35mm film was sold this year than in the history of mankind.
It's funny to pronounce something dead that's at its peak of
popularity.

--

That's true, but very misleading.

If you carefully read Kodak's annual report, you'll see that the
increase in film sales came from penetration into new markets. In
other words, they are no selling lots of film into developing
countries that previously had very few cameras, particularly China
and India! The problem for film producers is that film sales will
soon start dropping in developed countries because everyone is
switching to digital.

riiiiight, 90% of US households have a film camera and 5% have
digital cameras.... what a funny definition of "everyone" !

There's three problems with that single sentence.

First, could you send me a reference to where you got that number?
That ratio may have been true about 3-4 years ago, but in 2000...no way.

Second, you're making the assumption that each film camera is going to be used as much as each digital camera. That's grossly incorrect. I bet that every single household that I know of does own a film camera, but probably only 10-20% shoot more than one roll of film per year.

Third, I wrote "switching to digital". That is a process, not a state. Are you saying that no more film users are going to switch to digital?

--
Andy Frazer
My website -> http://www.gorillasites.com
Please comment on this one -> http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=229781

 

[andyfrazer]

riiiiight, 90% of US households have a film camera and 5% have
digital cameras.... what a funny definition of "everyone" !

Because the typical digital camera costs a lot more than a typical
film camera, when you look at sales figures it looks like digital
cameras have made really big inroads. But when you look at unit
sales, then digital cameras haven't made such big inroads.

I don't know the exact numbers, but unit sales of digital cameras are growing much faster than unit sales of film cameras. In fact, I don't even know if unit sales of film cameras are growing at all (in developed countries).

--
Andy Frazer
My website -> http://www.gorillasites.com
Please comment on this one -> http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=229781

 

[Capital Man]

A MF size CCD will always beyond most people's budget.

That's true, if you believe that continual improvements to
semiconductor manufacturing technology will come to grinding halt,
transistor device sizes will stop getting smaller, and the demand
for cheaper-and-better consumer electronics will just suddenly stop.

It will take millions of dollars of research to make better CCDs. If the audience is too small to justify millions of dollars of R&D on large size CCDs, then it won't happen.

 

[Capital Man]

Third, I wrote "switching to digital". That is a process, not a
state. Are you saying that no more film users are going to switch
to digital?

I'm sure more people will switch, but... do your own informal survey. Ask people you know don't own a digital camera "why don't you own a digital camera?" See what they say.

 

[John Runciman]

Have been using the D60 for a couple weeks... six years ago I read
that a 6 megapixel camera would replace 35mm. Is it time to shelve
my 1V?

I will never go back to 35mm, I used it for years
Love my
D60
John
http://www.grangephotography.co.uk

 

[Jeff Singer94142]

I would have said yes!

I've never shot with film. I've only used my D30 and now my D60. Well, I just started photography school and of course, we need to use film. So I bought a Elan 7 to go with the lenses I have for my D60.

Well, I just got my first ever roll of color film back and I am AMAZED! I used Fuji Velvia and (I think Provia). I am astonished at the color and sharpness of these pictures. I know that the lab did some post processing on the image just as I do with my digital images, so I know the pictures aren't this good out of the can.

The whole time I was taking pictures with film I was thinking "this sucks, I can't wait to go back to my digital camera!!!!" After every shot... even after 4 rolls... I would look down to see a picture on an LCD that wasn't there. Then, I had to wait to finish the rolls (and switch mid roll twice for differnt speed films) and then wait again to get them developed before I'd even know what these shots looked like!!!! Again, I was thinking this morning when I dropped off the film... "I can't wait to start shooting digital again!!!!"

Then, I just got my slides back... WOW. Shots I took this morning on a dull overcast day still turned out bright and vibrant. Everything looked tack sharp (ok, I know... its just a slide... I'm sure that will change when I get an 8x10 print). I am truly amazed at film quality.

Having said that... I still can't wait to shoot with my digital again!!!! Its just too damn convenient! I don't have to waste shots when I "know" i have it... and I usually "know" because of the LCD... I'm not good enought to take the shot and "just know."

I think I do a pretty good job on postprocessing my digital images to make them look pretty vibrant... I like the high saturation look:
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=275943
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=227828
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=260625

But, from what I see on the slides (so far) they look pretty amazing and I'm not sure my digital images can compare. Having said that I've
a: never printed any of my digital images with a high quality printer
b: haven't seen a print from my slide film shots yet
c: haven't transfered my film shots to digital with a high quality printer yet.

So, that may change... but this is my initial reaction so far because I was so shocked how well my first film shots came out.

Jeff

Have been using the D60 for a couple weeks... six years ago I read
that a 6 megapixel camera would replace 35mm. Is it time to shelve
my 1V?

--
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS

 

[Jeff Singer94142]

I did duplicate some shots with my digital (swapped cameras on a tripod shot). The shots on digital (even after photoshopping) didn't do anything for me... but the same shot on Velvia slide worked for me.

But again... I know that the shots can be had with Digital and the D60... so I still can't wait to start shooting digital again!

Thankfully some of my teachers will accept digital shots starting in November.

Jeff

I've never shot with film. I've only used my D30 and now my D60.
Well, I just started photography school and of course, we need to
use film. So I bought a Elan 7 to go with the lenses I have for my
D60.

Well, I just got my first ever roll of color film back and I am
AMAZED! I used Fuji Velvia and (I think Provia). I am astonished
at the color and sharpness of these pictures. I know that the lab
did some post processing on the image just as I do with my digital
images, so I know the pictures aren't this good out of the can.

The whole time I was taking pictures with film I was thinking "this
sucks, I can't wait to go back to my digital camera!!!!" After
every shot... even after 4 rolls... I would look down to see a
picture on an LCD that wasn't there. Then, I had to wait to finish
the rolls (and switch mid roll twice for differnt speed films) and
then wait again to get them developed before I'd even know what
these shots looked like!!!! Again, I was thinking this morning
when I dropped off the film... "I can't wait to start shooting
digital again!!!!"

Then, I just got my slides back... WOW. Shots I took this morning
on a dull overcast day still turned out bright and vibrant.
Everything looked tack sharp (ok, I know... its just a slide... I'm
sure that will change when I get an 8x10 print). I am truly amazed
at film quality.

Having said that... I still can't wait to shoot with my digital
again!!!! Its just too damn convenient! I don't have to waste
shots when I "know" i have it... and I usually "know" because of
the LCD... I'm not good enought to take the shot and "just know."

I think I do a pretty good job on postprocessing my digital images
to make them look pretty vibrant... I like the high saturation look:
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=275943
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=227828
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=260625

But, from what I see on the slides (so far) they look pretty
amazing and I'm not sure my digital images can compare. Having
said that I've
a: never printed any of my digital images with a high quality printer
b: haven't seen a print from my slide film shots yet
c: haven't transfered my film shots to digital with a high quality
printer yet.

So, that may change... but this is my initial reaction so far
because I was so shocked how well my first film shots came out.

Jeff

Have been using the D60 for a couple weeks... six years ago I read
that a 6 megapixel camera would replace 35mm. Is it time to shelve
my 1V?

--
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS

--
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS

 

[Ken Phillips]

After not picking it up for two months, I finished up a roll of film ... and EVERY SHOT I looked at the back of it! My friend was howling!
Ken

I've never shot with film. I've only used my D30 and now my D60.
Well, I just started photography school and of course, we need to
use film. So I bought a Elan 7 to go with the lenses I have for my
D60.

Well, I just got my first ever roll of color film back and I am
AMAZED! I used Fuji Velvia and (I think Provia). I am astonished
at the color and sharpness of these pictures. I know that the lab
did some post processing on the image just as I do with my digital
images, so I know the pictures aren't this good out of the can.

The whole time I was taking pictures with film I was thinking "this
sucks, I can't wait to go back to my digital camera!!!!" After
every shot... even after 4 rolls... I would look down to see a
picture on an LCD that wasn't there. Then, I had to wait to finish
the rolls (and switch mid roll twice for differnt speed films) and
then wait again to get them developed before I'd even know what
these shots looked like!!!! Again, I was thinking this morning
when I dropped off the film... "I can't wait to start shooting
digital again!!!!"

Then, I just got my slides back... WOW. Shots I took this morning
on a dull overcast day still turned out bright and vibrant.
Everything looked tack sharp (ok, I know... its just a slide... I'm
sure that will change when I get an 8x10 print). I am truly amazed
at film quality.

Having said that... I still can't wait to shoot with my digital
again!!!! Its just too damn convenient! I don't have to waste
shots when I "know" i have it... and I usually "know" because of
the LCD... I'm not good enought to take the shot and "just know."

I think I do a pretty good job on postprocessing my digital images
to make them look pretty vibrant... I like the high saturation look:
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=275943
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=227828
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=260625

But, from what I see on the slides (so far) they look pretty
amazing and I'm not sure my digital images can compare. Having
said that I've
a: never printed any of my digital images with a high quality printer
b: haven't seen a print from my slide film shots yet
c: haven't transfered my film shots to digital with a high quality
printer yet.

So, that may change... but this is my initial reaction so far
because I was so shocked how well my first film shots came out.

Jeff

Have been using the D60 for a couple weeks... six years ago I read
that a 6 megapixel camera would replace 35mm. Is it time to shelve
my 1V?

--
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS

--

All kinds of old camera and motion picture bodies, lenses, tripods, enlargers, mostly gathering dust, because digital is immediate! NO Canon 1200mm f/5.6.

 

[Dana Jacobsen]

After not picking it up for two months, I finished up a roll of
film ... and EVERY SHOT I looked at the back of it! My friend was
howling!

Fascinating. I am not an old hand at photography -- I used my film SLR for about 8 rolls before switching to the D60. I find that I look at the LCD for the first shots in different light, and if I am particularly curious about something (Hmm -- white background, I wonder if that threw off the meter; I wonder if I got that expression just right; etc.). But inbetween I just take pictures without looking at the back at all. Often tapping the shutter button to stop it from coming up. I seems like I'd miss too many opportunities if I was constantly watching the camera back between every shot. Besides, if the light hasn't changed there is often no reason to look. I'll look when I get them to the computer.

I'm sure this would change based on the type of photo. For landscapes I'd probably check more. For pictures of kids, especially candids, it isn't like I can make them repeat anything. For cars I rarely look until a break because I've got more shots to take.

 

[Kevin Omura]

Well you know, the fundamentals of composition, lighting and techniques do cross over from film to digital...

Btw what school are you at, Banff, Ryerson or somewhere else?

Kevin

 

[Igor R.]

EOS 1DS sure will reach small MF !

No. To replace 6*4.5 you need atleast 30 true megapixels and 14 bit A> D converter.

 

[Igor R.]

Kodak stopped making Kodak Gold 100.

Gold is cr@p.

ISO 100 film is now considered advanced film for the serious
photographer, and not typical consumer film.

It is the only film for studios. Sometimes they also using Iso 50 and 25 films, they have better resolution.

 

[colin britton]

It would seem to me that much depends on the way each of us practises photography..... for the professionals amongst us, where time is money, and there is presumably a revenue stream as a base to justify the purchase of the "right tools", a digital camera makes a lot of sense. Those of us who are amateurs have on the one hand, more degrees of freedom, in that we only need satisfy ourselves( well our significant others as well, I suppose) . At the same time, we are funding our hobby out of after tax income so there are different financial considerations. Under these conditions, the fact that one can buy a 1V for less than the price of a D60, let alone a 1D at 2 1/2 times as much, must come into play. I enjoy using my N* (gasp) 995 very much, but I don't intend putting down my Canon film cameras for a long time, particularly when my lab delivers the pictures on both negative and CD so I can post process to my heart's content.

 

[Al Pacheco]

I was at a party recently where more than 100 people attended. Mixed ages from teens to over sixty. Mixed professions, also.

I counted six digital cameras. Only one was still being used after an hour or so. Dead batteries, memory filled, and a few "I can't figure this &!%@ thing out!".

Many one-time-use throw-aways (Kodak, Fuji, etc).

A handful of good 35mm point&shoots.

My wife brought our Polaroid (Spectra). Out of ten packs of film we brought home about a dozen shots. All the rest were gobbled up by others. No memory, shutter-lag, etc.

I had my D30 in the car. Left it there, too. When asked to "take a few" I dug out my Olympus Stylus Epic and banged away. Now I have Five rolls to get developed (and I haven't done it yet!).

Digital is here but it has a long way to go. A very long way to go. I'm not entirely sure it will make it beyond what we are seeing now.... Pros & amateurs who have the $ to afford a good digital and the time to learn the ropes.

And will the newbies go digging through all the info that's been documented slowly but surely over the last few years? Think about all the tips and secrets and shortcuts and profiles and actions and color spaces and....whew!

I hope I'm wrong.
My future depends upon it more so than most on this site.

I'm off to Photokina in a few days.
My digital won't be coming along.

The Oly in my jacket pocket and my 35mm rangefinder tucked in somewhere in case I get to do some sightseeing.

Keep truckin'

Third, I wrote "switching to digital". That is a process, not a
state. Are you saying that no more film users are going to switch
to digital?

I'm sure more people will switch, but... do your own informal
survey. Ask people you know don't own a digital camera "why don't
you own a digital camera?" See what they say.

 

[Robert P Miller]

Thanks for the name. I'll do a search and see what it is about. The mega pixel count sounds staggering as is its price I'm sure.
Thanks,
Robert

 

[Jeff Singer94142]

Western Academy Of Photography in Victoria

Well you know, the fundamentals of composition, lighting and
techniques do cross over from film to digital...

Btw what school are you at, Banff, Ryerson or somewhere else?

Kevin

--
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS