Forgive me as I have sinned.

[Lanline]

In 1999 I was totally in digital. A friend asked me to try a film camera in 2007 and I scoffed at him and declared film was dead. 2008 I shot a film camera and got re-addicted again. I totally ignored the digital craze from 2008 until recently. I bought another DSLR out of guilt/want/feeling left out/wanting to be in

I have to say that I can shoot 12 FILM frames and get 9 keepers (IMHO). I shot 150+ digital today and didn't get anything I liked. In fact, if I had not lost that dammed lens cap... I would have returned the dslr today.


I feel like I wasted $830 on a digital. I do SO MUCH BETTER WITH FILM.

Is it just me or do others struggle with DIGITAL/FILM? I went to a photo show last night and the photos were described as DIGITAL NEGATIVES and INKJET PRINTS! What? Turns out that is the new phrase for shot it with a digital and printed it with a inkjet.

[5stringdeath]

I shoot with both. But I do different things with digital. No, not HDR But I haven't touched my 5D since January. Was out with friends today and one of them asked "what are you doing?" when he saw me changing film, haha. Love that. He was taking pictures with his cellphone :P

There are a lot of labels you can put on a wall to describe prints. I remember when I used to think "Silver Gelatin Print" was pretentious, hehe. Technically a DNG is a "digital negative" file, but really its just a file extention.

I'll tag mine as Archival Inkjet Prints. I mean, what's wrong with describing the output method? People who want to buy art do want to know its going to be archival. Oddly enough, a lot of people who print digitally don't use archival materials. Eh, who cares ... its the galleries responsibility

Conversely, you could improperly fix a nice B&W print and piss off a buyer in a few years as well.

Just out of curiosity, what camera did you buy? You can always eBay it, hehe.

BTW, its not a sin to shoot digital. It's a sin to sell your film gear to buy digital.

[zenlibra]

I have similar feelings regarding shooting film and a high ratio of shots I like. In fact, even if I shoot a roll that is a dud, I still feel like I accomplished something. From choosing my film to shooting it and developing it, the process is so much more rewarding than shooting digital.

[Lanline]

I bought a SONY 550L... it accepts my MINOLTA lenses and flashes. Yes, I said MINOLTA. My 50mm f1.7 Maxxum lens is sharp and I love it! There is an example in my images here. I will not sell my film gear, I prefer to be buried with it and 1 gallon of D-76 and a few rolls of Neopan.

[Nikanon]

I've been playing the game for about 3 years now. I was about 17 when i started, just turning 18, and I got a DSLR because at the time, that was the market and thats all I knew photography to be. Were it not for seeing some Ansel Adams prints, I may not have learned about films potential for a while. I had seen many digital prints before then that impressed me, but nothing touched Ansel's prints, nor any other darkroom print from the greats. There are many factors to what make film and digital different and but makes one more desirable to an individual is what you hold as a value. Mostly digital shooters out talking down film appear to have some sort of fear, as if advertising they shoot digital makes them feel better about some sort of guilt they have from doing so. Film holds a value for me in philosophical and physical terms that digital can only attempt to replicate. It is, however, good to know your enemy, whomever he may be.

Nikanon

[chriscrawfordphoto]

A digital camera has its uses, even for those of us who shoot all film for our artistic work. Need to sell some gear? Use the digital to photograph it for ebay or the APUG classifieds. Need a quick shot of something, digital's perfect for that. Great for snapshots of your pets and kids too. I gave my Nikon D70 to my son 2 yrs ago when he was 11 yrs old and he is 13 and still using it and having fun. He's using the photos to make stop-motion animations with Lego bricks...digital's perfect for that too. I sometimes borrow it to shoot stuff for ebay, but aside from that I'm all film.

[codester]

I too jumped all in with digital in 2003. At the time I was working for a newspaper so it made sense, sort of. After the initial gee whiz wore off, I found myself liking photography less and less. My photographs stopped appealing to me. There was something missing in them. Don't get me wrong. I did shoot some really great stuff over the three years I shot digital but like the OP my usable shots were less and less.
Then I got my gear stolen while traveling in Europe. The thief took all my digital gear leaving behind an FM2 and an F3 and a pair of manual focus lenses. I fell in love with photography again.
In 2008, I again joined a newspaper and jumped back into digital. My heart was never in it from the beginning and seven months later I left. I haven't shot a single frame of digital since.
I understand what people say about digital having its uses, especially in newspaper and deadline journalism (although I could argue against digital even in those fields) but I guess some of us just don't fit into the automation. I feel comfortable using film. It's a process which works for me 99 per cent of the time.

[benjiboy]

The only digital camera I own is in my cell phone and I've only used it once, after more than fifty years I'm still trying to understand and appreciate the beautiful simplicity of the the action of light on film and photographic paper, I've been shooting film all my adult life, and although I could afford to re-equip myself for digital photography I have neither the inclination or the patience to start learning photography all over again, in fact my commitment to continuing using film is such that in the last year I have had all my cameras professionally serviced, and I will be happy to continue using them for as long as I live.

[railwayman3]

I got quite excited when I first used a digital...instant results, no film costs, unlimited shots to choose the best. But this wained, I never got round to printing and there was just something unsatisfying about the whole thing.
So it was back to film, and a new enthusiasm and enjoyment in taking time to try to get "quality" pictures and meeting the challenges of the media. The pocket digital has been relegated to being a "notebook" for ephemeral records for work and personal, so the best of both worlds.

[stradibarrius]

I got into photography to take photos of my violins to help me sell and market them. As I grew in photography film came on the scene and for me film is so much more enjoyable. the whole process is more enjoyable for me. I think more about the shot with film and I think my best photographs have been with my Nikon FE. But digital still makes color product shots much easier. When a potiental client asked for photos of a violin, I can go set up my lights snap a few, run them through PS and send the off. But again for me there is no romance in the process. For me film is more of an art form digital is more of a recording device.
I wish I could make film work for my travel photography...again for me digital seems to be easier for that. But I can not help but wonder what some of my travel shot would be like if I had taken them with film???