Photography : Film or digital?

Question

I was in photography class the other day and my classmates were fidgeting with their work on the computers and the topic of Film vs. Digital came up. So I was wondering on other people's opinions on the topic.

Which do you prefer?

Which do you think is better?

This is simply out of curiosity, not really for anything important.
So state your opinion and give me your reasoning.

Thanks
~Someone Who asks questions

Answer 1

Oh my, this is a decade old argument.





Journalism, sports, wildlife, internet publications, weddings are perfect subjects for digital.



Landscape, huge prints, gorgeous shallow DOF or a real need for attractive tonality requires film and the larger formats attendant to film.

Answer 2

I've started with film. Not that I wanted that, but that was the camera destiny put in my hands. In fact I didn't care too much about photography until 2005 when the river from my area flooded, taking bridges, houses, animals along the way. In that morning a neighbor just handed me a film camera, a really simple yet good one, and before going to help out people, he told me to shoot around. I've made about 70 pictures, some of them really great even though, at that time, I had no idea what photography was about. This kind of start is really sad and I don't quite like remembering it, but... was a new beginning for me. After a year and a half I bought myself a 2mpx camera which helped me making the first steps, learn new stuff, then a 7mpx ps camera followed, but didn't use it for a long time, because a dslr "came into picture". Now I have two dslr cameras, some lenses, two flashes and... a pinhole! Anyway, film camera will come soon, I have new experiments and ideas for the future... All I need is the time, that's the only thing I miss at this point!

Answer 3

Ok, here goes an answer from someone who has been thinking about this for a long time. Digital is a miracle of technology. Instant photos to see. You know if you got a good shot in a click. They are so easy to manipulate and correct, to combine and overlay. The artistic capability is amazing. No film to buy, no chemicals to see the image. Film is the medium of the masters. It makes one think about the composition, the time and aperature needed for a correct exposure, and in the darkroom, the printmaking skills are the make or break for a great print. Your choice of film type, paper surface, and many other decisions are the ingredients of the art. Like a painter choosing pigments, brushes, oils and canvas. I stopped professional photography as the digital age came in. I use a pocket sized 10 meg Casio for my shoot and point and it is never out of my reach. Images are fantastic. Here is the sad, sad legacy of digital: in 20 years almost none of the images we take now will be visable because technology will change and require us to copy and convert to the new formats. How many of us have converted our family videos, taken with VHS, onto DVD or Blue Ray? We all have a shoebox or photo album of family photos in black and white or early color prints. These are a priceless heritage of family history. Today, the digital images taken will be lost on some dusty or scratched CD or flash drive and will never be seen by our grandchildren who will not have the machine to read our early digital photo files or the time and inclination to try. Do you have a record player to play your Dad's old 78 rpm recordings? How about a movie projector to show old home movies? I rest my case.

Answer 4

I prefer to use film...I love taking landscape photos and I use almost entirely film (35mm and 120 size roll film). I like it better for many reasons. For one thing, it's a lot more fun to use a vintage all-metal mechanical camera. Also, there is something special about the snap of the shutter on a mechanical film camera...instead of the wimpy beep of a digital camera.



The other reason is that I can get MUCH better quality pictures with film. I develop my own black and white film and pictures. (I have a darkroom in my garage). And the amount of detail you can get with a REAL optical print from an enlarger and developed in a darkroom will blow away any "pics" from a digital camera. (Especially 120 size film...the detail it can pick up is amazing).



And just so people know, I'm not some old man who is just longing for the past. I'm 31. I've been around computers my entire life, and the Internet has been around most of my life. I've grown up with technology. But I just prefer to use film cameras because I can take much better quality pictures with film, and it's also a lot more fun. It feels more like real photography.

Answer 5

I've been interested in photography for roughly three-quarters of my life, having learned "in the days of yore," i.e., before digital photography was a gleam in someone's eye.



Personally, I prefer film over digital for a variety of reasons, and in certain ways, it's superior. To wit:



(1) Slides and negatives will often have a tonal range not easily duplicated or captured with digital technology.



(2) Film does not require technology to view it; hold the slide or negative up to the light, and you can view the image. Years from now, my slides and negatives will still be viewable by my descendants; I have no idea whether they will be able to view and enjoy the digital pictures I take.



(3) Digital requires power for both capture and viewing. If your batteries die, you're sunk both ways if you don't have a backup set. WIth an all-manual, mechanical camera whose shutter is not dependent on batteries for operation, the film will ALWAYS capture the image.



(4) Digital's biggest Achilles heels is its vulnerability and dependence on technology: accidental deletion, hard drive crash, EM spike, etc. While film is also subject to loss, e.g., accidental exposure to light, improper storage conditions, and so forth, it will do well provided reasonable measures are taken for storage: cool, dark places.



However, even as a film fan, I realize digital has its place; for instance, taking pictures of items to list on eBay is vastly easier with a digital camera, which is one of the specific reasons why I bought a digital point-and-shoot.

Answer 6

I am getting rather weary of this question. Its been asked in various forms far too many times.



I shoot film. I'm not a prolific shooter, perhaps two 36 exposure rolls a week. To achieve the same results with digital I'd have to spend 8 to 10 thousand dollars - nothing would suffice except a full-frame body and I'd want lenses comparable to what I have in my 35mm kit - a dozen primes with only 2 zooms. Perhaps if I were 22 instead of 62 I'd think differently...

Answer 7

Now that image quality has progressed to the point it is at now, I have no idea why people would want to shoot film. You have your own dark room on your PC. Instant access to pictures. Easily distributed in a variety of mediums. Digital wins for me.





http://freephotographytutorials.blogspot.com/

Answer 8

i like digital for the fact that the pictures are easily accessable on the computer and mostly have good quality

but when they're on the computer, theres plenty of risk of them being deleted or your computer crashing and everything being gone



i like film because everythings in front of you and you can put it into a scrapbook and stuff

but films cost money to develop...

answer mine? https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20090318184502AAfc7h0

Answer 9

You kidding me right?

Are you still watching Black and White TV on an antenna?

Still listening to 45 RPM records on your Magnavox cabinet stereo?

Still watching reruns of "I Love Lucy"??

Take the horse and buggy to school?



C'mon. 35mm film cameras are SOOOOO last century. I can "manipulate" my digital images to a far greater level of perfection with digital than I ever could in the darkroom. I can shoot 100 photos and delete as many as I like within seconds after I take them, and decide which ones are good and which ones are bad WITHOUT it costing me an arm and a leg in film processing and the 2 day wait from the developer. I can make on the spot corrections to my ISO, shutter speeds or aperature based on the image I see in my monitor. Kodak made millions of dollars on BAD photographers, but those days are soooooo done with. No more chemicals, chemical waste, darkrooms, safelights, enlargers and all that equipment.



Even the medium format and large format cameras (which were once used by landscape photographers such as Ansel Adams to make huge enlargements) are now going digital.



This decision is TRUELY a No-Brainer.

Answer 10

film is digital once you scan it..........



i love both mediums, those say one is "better" than the other must be lost somewhere in mediocre image making land