But that was when I graduated college!
Originally Posted by alan doyle
Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!
Nothing beats a great piece of glass!
I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.
FWIW, I'm sure there is another thread here on APUG discussing this very blog. I seem to remember that Christopher Walrath started that thread (but I certainly could be mistaken).
Note that this is a reprint of something originally published in 2007.
There are facts nested in that article, but I think the presentation is skewed. The writer acts like he's presenting something revolutionary and maybe it was for him at the time, but he uses "we" as if every photographer thought the way he does and would be bowled over by his wife's observation that there's no logical reason to devote to one way over the other.
News flash: Not only are countless hoards of us owners of both digital and film cameras, switching between them however we feel like it, we also still use pens, pencils and paper when it suits us instead of a computer. I own several computers that do things I'd never want to do on paper, but the fact remains it's faster at times to scribble on paper than work on a computer, so sometimes I scribble on paper. It's been so since I was in high school and computers were first available to us for word processing.
"Digital" does this and "digital does that," is still buying into the mythic binary world where there's two forces arrayed in battle for domination. Unless your computer is stealing your pens and hiding your paper, it's not in your way. If you're trying to design on a computer when you'd be better off using a marker and newsprint pad, it's not the computer's fault. It's yours. Similarly, I'm pretty sure that no brand of digital camera is sneaking around the house at night fogging rolls of film and spoiling developer, so again, if you shoot your Nikon D300 when in your heart you know you'd rather be shooting your Mamiya Super, it's not the D300's fault. It's yours.
Getting back to the photographic side though, I don't believe film is making a "comeback" as that would imply that it's gotten back up after falling down. The facts today remain the same as a few years ago that digital has displaced film as the dominant photographic medium when it comes to raw numbers, but film's continuing service is pretty much holding out in the same areas as before. The only thing that can be said is that now that the digital revolution has calmed down people are less inclined to bag on film and ask why you haven't switched to digital yet, but that's not the same thing as a comeback.
Last thought about the upside of accidents. It's arguable whether this is a benefit of film or not, but I will say that the possibility of more accidents doesn't make film a more creative medium, just a more random one. If I screw up my film processing and end up with something I like, that doesn't make me more creative. It just means I had a lucky accident.
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/184.108.40.206 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/220.127.116.11.0)
Maybe it's time I learned to make paper. At least on a limited basis. Might prove a handy skill down the road.
I found that article, and most of the comments to be refreshingly free of the Film vs Digital dick waving that so often goes on.
I use a point and shoot digital for grab shots, I'm not over convinced about the quality. I use film in numerous camera for the stuff I hope will be worth showing outside the family circle. I like what I do.
I also shoot film in a ratio of about 20:1 to digital.
"Flatter Me, and I May Not Believe You. Criticize Me, and I May Not like You. Ignore Me, and I May Not Forgive You. Encourage Me, and I Will Not Forget You."
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Originally Posted by Aurum
I keep a G9 in my Hasselblad kit. It's fast, easy, makes a good light meter with some reach, and gives me pretty good RAW files to play with while I'm waiting for my film from the lab.
I enjoy printing the 6x6 negatives and playing with the digital files. I wont argue digital vs. film for quality, but for archiving, I'll stick with film.
If someone breaks in, a couple of hard drives can fit in a coat pocket and fetch 5-10 dollars at a pawn shop. A couple of filing cabinets full of negatives? Now, stealing those would be a neat trick.
The author's point is as much about how the artist works as it is about film. His observations echo my own as a teacher- the students I trained in the days of manual paste-up, sketch pads, and film(s) - photographic and repro lith - are better and quicker designers and photographers than those who have grown up in the totally digital age. Bottom line, the computer is pretty good but it is for sure "two-dimensional" in a very binary sort of way.
I thought that article looked familiar. I cannot find the original thread but I scrolled down on the article and, sure enough, there was little old me spouting my fool head off (if you can imagine such an absurd idea). ;p
Originally Posted by MattKing
Helping to save analog photography one exposure at a time
Found it - it was in a thread started by dwdmguy at the end of April: