|
|
Post by admin on Feb 15, 2011 18:04:09 GMT -8
Ever notice how music played from an LP sounds richer than music played from a CD?. That's the difference between analog and digital. Digital does not capture all the data.
Likewise, digital photography can be rather cold sometimes. So I am going retro and exploring analog photography using film. This pic was taken with my vintage Minolta Maxxum 7000 SLR + vintage Minolta 50/1.7 lens and scanned to digital from the negative, no post processing.
In many ways this is a lot better than what I can get from my cropped sensor Sony a700 APS-C digital camera. It is a 'full frame' image. To get professional-grade full-frame on a digital camera I would have to spend $2000 or more on the camera body alone! My 25-year old Minolta 7000 body was purchased off of eBay for $100. Lens can be had for about $50.00.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by modestomoths on Feb 15, 2011 20:30:40 GMT -8
I also love film, especially for what you can do with black and white. But the cost of film and processing quickly surpasses what you save on a nice digital camera body. I don't think digital will ever be able to duplicate all the effects of film (the process is too controlled), but I've concluded that digital is cheaper and more versatile for everyday shots.
Travis
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Feb 15, 2011 21:44:38 GMT -8
It's cheaper for everyday shots, yes. But I'm getting tired of it. Trying something new. I haven't used film for about 20 years!
|
|
|
|
Post by Alexander N on Feb 15, 2011 21:51:54 GMT -8
That is a fantastic shot Clark.
I agree that there is a sort of richness when shooting with film in my little experience using it. I don't use film at all for my photography work for the simple fact that I can't quickly learn and use trial and error. With digital it's a matter of a few pushes of the button to fix your exposure mistakes. For me I don't use film because I don't have the time to dedicate to it now.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Feb 15, 2011 23:00:29 GMT -8
Film forces you to think more, because every shot costs you money. Whereas with digital, once you have made your initial investment in gear, the pictures are free. Thus shooting with film, you get a valuable education.
|
|
|
|
Post by modestomoths on Feb 16, 2011 8:20:27 GMT -8
It's true, it takes skill and an understanding of the process to take good pictures with film. I learned photography on film cameras, so I guess I take it for granted. Like most things, the more involved you are in the process, the more satisfying the results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Feb 22, 2011 2:22:26 GMT -8
I work in advertising and 35 mm film gives still today far better lights and reflects than HD digital camera, when shooting outside.
It cost about 15 k€ more for a TV ad, but it's worth the price
Olivier
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Feb 22, 2011 10:44:00 GMT -8
I work in advertising and 35 mm film gives still today far better lights and reflects than HD digital camera, when shooting outside. It cost about 15 k€ more for a TV ad, but it's worth the price Olivier Tell me more. |
|
|
|
Post by prillbug2 on Mar 4, 2011 13:00:56 GMT -8
Clark:
Even the recording industry, most of the mix downs are from digital recording to analogue recording because it ultimately sounds better to do it that way.
Jeff Prill
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Mar 4, 2011 13:26:30 GMT -8
Clark: Even the recording industry, most of the mix downs are from digital recording to analogue recording because it ultimately sounds better to do it that way. Jeff Prill That is interesting. But the finished product is still a digital output. |
|
|
|
Post by Alexander N on Mar 4, 2011 15:37:36 GMT -8
I just bought an adapter for my FD lenses to fit my EOS EF body. So far excellent results. I actually enjoy using the fully manual lens.
|
|
