3 ms·

You see the same stupid "analog is better" shit among photographers, even today. Digital SLRs (even APS-frame-size ones) surpassed the best 35mm film money cou

You see the same stupid "analog is better" shit among photographers, even today. Digital SLRs (even APS-frame-size ones) surpassed the best 35mm film money could buy (retail or even "professional") in the mid 2000's in terms of resolution at a given ISO, dynamic range, and even focus (a digital sensor can be flatter than a piece of film ever could be, thus ensuring consistent focus across the entire film plane.) I'm sure the boys at the CIA and whatnot had much fancier film for their cameras, but even they went digital a long, long time ago. Even back in the mid 2000's retail-available sensors were starting to approach theoretical quantum limits in efficiency of turning photons into a state change on the sensor well they strike. These days some cameras are just stunning with what they can do with the tiniest amount of available light. Digital is cheaper past a fairly low number of photos, has no per-shot expenditure, you can store tens of thousands of photos on something the size of a thumbnail, you get instant review of things like exposure and "did anyone blink", you can instantly back up the photo to multiple sources (most mid to high level digital SLRs have provisions for mirroring photos to a second card), you can do focus stacking and HDR and panoramas so easily many cameras can do it internally, you can instantly transmit the photos around the world as many cameras have wifi built-in and apps for smartphones that work with it, film and print development is slow, cumbersome, very difficult to do consistently and usually involves pretty toxic chemicals and fair amount of dedicated space. And yet there are still assholes, fifteen years after film was eclipsed, who will stroke their goatee and tell you why their Pentax K1000 with insert film you've never heard of is "better." I can make the stuff coming out of my digital camera look just like the shit coming out of their camera, only in a fraction of the time, for less cost.

yariik 5y ago
Go away with your useless new technology and let people (aka "assholes", as you called them) use what they like.
david38 5y ago
Wow. That’s just laughable. There are some benefits to film, but digital can mimic them all. With film you have to think about your pictures a little more because you can shoot 400 shots per role. Trivial to use a tiny memory card. With film, you can put your negatives in a box and never lose them, compared to the hell of always managing digital storage. Surely you can get slides made from digital files. With film, each type has its own characteristics, all of which are copyable in software.
- NikolaNovak 5y ago
  Ah that reminds me of all the internet film experts in that time frame who would use desktop digital scanner as the last step. Listen, I get techno Fetishism. If you say that shooting with film camera feels better for you, brilliant. If you claim you prefer vinyl, awesome. It's when we start making claims of objective superiority that I lose respect and attention.
  - thatfunkymunki 5y ago
    You'd have to get a pretty expensive digital camera to get as overall high quality photos as a nice medium format (not to mention large format) film camera, to be fair. But only a fool would use film instead of digital for this reason. I just like the hardware more and it's cheaper than an equivalent digital setup.
    - NikolaNovak 5y ago
      I think it's still important to distinguish are we discussing process, or end result. If the end result is for photo to be viewed on monitor, phone, TV, photo album, or say 11x19 poster, I don't know if there's effective difference by the end between a 45MP FX digital, or a medium/large frame film. The process though is largely different, including the approach and the sensation and the sense of handling. I fully recognize the important of joy of process. (It's just that, if I swung that way, I'd go all the way and use the twin reflex film camera for a truly different experience :-D. )
      - david38 5y ago
        I’ve shot medium format, had a lab at home, and now use a Sony a7R IV. The process of developing film was way more fun than my current use of Lightroom, but my $$ conscious self couldn’t stop thinking of how much practice cost. This thought process happened with my woodworking hobby as well :(. That said, my Sony rivals a medium format in resolution. If we take joy out of the equation, say we’re doing this as part of a business process, digital is better in all but a handful of cases.
i_am_proteus 5y ago
Why are you so angry about this? I enjoy shooting 4x5 black and white film because of the limitations of the format, not in spite of them. I use a DSLR for paid work. I like to think the time with the 4x5 makes me better at making photos with the DSLR. It doesn't matter if this is true or not.
nbzso 5y ago
I love tecnographers to tell me that I am an asshole. Seriously. Film is a medium. Technical race is over. Digital coupled with algorithms for "ultimate" technical exposure is the winner. So what? Film has a natural grain, grain emulation made digitally is obvious for a trained eye. Film has a chemically based development, you can alter exposure in different ways and produce different results. Shooting film makes you a better photographer. Why? Because to produce a decent photo you must know the exposure triangle and focus. Focus, because there is no computer to help you and make you think that you are "the best" ever, and if you are not - you can always fix it in post. Learning to do all in camera is giving you advantage in expression. Expression. This is the key word here. The world of humans has become so narrow, so predictable and binary, that we are fighting with our natural human psychology. Under the command of the technocratic elites moving us forward to the ultimate vision of AI overlords and never-ending cycle of unnecessary software and hardware updates. Don't let me start on security. Try to hack my Leica M3 - remotely. Film is made for print. Printing has a value in itself. And the process requires more skill and knowledge than applying some LUTs or predefined filters. 1000 megapixel cameras with AI will not make you an artist. Connecting to a real human world and caring will make you one. Yes, you can express this with a smartphone camera without a doubt, but the choice of film is similar to the choice of oil painting as a medium. Or should I be asshole again for not using digital painting as a medium of choice. You know, painting digitally is so technically superior. You have undo and redo. Layers and masks. Why live in the past and not embrace the future? Why learn to play an instrument? The computers are so much better. P.S. I responded to your "emotionally" charged opinion with an equal reflection. The main point is that everything has a value as an experience, process and end result. To dismiss someone choices over "technical" logic is a false positive. Technically educated people can buy a vinyl record. For different reasons, aesthetically or experience based ones. Putting all the eggs in one basket is not a balanced approach at all.

yariik 5y ago

Go away with your useless new technology and let people (aka "assholes", as you called them) use what they like.

david38 5y ago

Wow. That’s just laughable. There are some benefits to film, but digital can mimic them all. With film you have to think about your pictures a little more because you can shoot 400 shots per role. Trivial to use a tiny memory card. With film, you can put your negatives in a box and never lose them, compared to the hell of always managing digital storage. Surely you can get slides made from digital files. With film, each type has its own characteristics, all of which are copyable in software.

NikolaNovak 5y ago
Ah that reminds me of all the internet film experts in that time frame who would use desktop digital scanner as the last step. Listen, I get techno Fetishism. If you say that shooting with film camera feels better for you, brilliant. If you claim you prefer vinyl, awesome. It's when we start making claims of objective superiority that I lose respect and attention.
- thatfunkymunki 5y ago
  You'd have to get a pretty expensive digital camera to get as overall high quality photos as a nice medium format (not to mention large format) film camera, to be fair. But only a fool would use film instead of digital for this reason. I just like the hardware more and it's cheaper than an equivalent digital setup.
  - NikolaNovak 5y ago
    I think it's still important to distinguish are we discussing process, or end result. If the end result is for photo to be viewed on monitor, phone, TV, photo album, or say 11x19 poster, I don't know if there's effective difference by the end between a 45MP FX digital, or a medium/large frame film. The process though is largely different, including the approach and the sensation and the sense of handling. I fully recognize the important of joy of process. (It's just that, if I swung that way, I'd go all the way and use the twin reflex film camera for a truly different experience :-D. )
    - david38 5y ago
      I’ve shot medium format, had a lab at home, and now use a Sony a7R IV. The process of developing film was way more fun than my current use of Lightroom, but my $$ conscious self couldn’t stop thinking of how much practice cost. This thought process happened with my woodworking hobby as well :(. That said, my Sony rivals a medium format in resolution. If we take joy out of the equation, say we’re doing this as part of a business process, digital is better in all but a handful of cases.

i_am_proteus 5y ago

Why are you so angry about this? I enjoy shooting 4x5 black and white film because of the limitations of the format, not in spite of them. I use a DSLR for paid work. I like to think the time with the 4x5 makes me better at making photos with the DSLR. It doesn't matter if this is true or not.

nbzso 5y ago

I love tecnographers to tell me that I am an asshole. Seriously. Film is a medium. Technical race is over. Digital coupled with algorithms for "ultimate" technical exposure is the winner. So what? Film has a natural grain, grain emulation made digitally is obvious for a trained eye. Film has a chemically based development, you can alter exposure in different ways and produce different results. Shooting film makes you a better photographer. Why? Because to produce a decent photo you must know the exposure triangle and focus. Focus, because there is no computer to help you and make you think that you are "the best" ever, and if you are not - you can always fix it in post. Learning to do all in camera is giving you advantage in expression. Expression. This is the key word here. The world of humans has become so narrow, so predictable and binary, that we are fighting with our natural human psychology. Under the command of the technocratic elites moving us forward to the ultimate vision of AI overlords and never-ending cycle of unnecessary software and hardware updates. Don't let me start on security. Try to hack my Leica M3 - remotely. Film is made for print. Printing has a value in itself. And the process requires more skill and knowledge than applying some LUTs or predefined filters. 1000 megapixel cameras with AI will not make you an artist. Connecting to a real human world and caring will make you one. Yes, you can express this with a smartphone camera without a doubt, but the choice of film is similar to the choice of oil painting as a medium. Or should I be asshole again for not using digital painting as a medium of choice. You know, painting digitally is so technically superior. You have undo and redo. Layers and masks. Why live in the past and not embrace the future? Why learn to play an instrument? The computers are so much better. P.S. I responded to your "emotionally" charged opinion with an equal reflection. The main point is that everything has a value as an experience, process and end result. To dismiss someone choices over "technical" logic is a false positive. Technically educated people can buy a vinyl record. For different reasons, aesthetically or experience based ones. Putting all the eggs in one basket is not a balanced approach at all.