Perhaps this is more a question for the Camera Drawn guys, but it could be a fun discussion =D The Question: (Broad) What is better The Question: (More specific) Which produces better results for the more artistic side of things, I know the pros of digital are they are easy to use, generally turn up nice pictures, but the major drawback is (For the type of camera you would need for total control over the picture) is the $500 + Price tag for a decent camera. With film, you get the true image, total control over the picture for a reasonable cost (Or not so reasonable if you have a nice camera from 15 years ago =D) But the drawback is the film, It is not in digital, most development labs can not turn out the pictures right and for best results you need to do it yourself. With a completely unbiased look at it, what is better for the more artistic, photographer? Topic Point? I still use an old film camera and can not decide if I want to drop the $500-1,000 for a decent digital camera (I really dislike the point and shoot cameras, so little control over the picture.) As of now, photography is just a hobby but It is one that I find myself spending more and more time on =D To be really specific, I am talking about the Digital SLR cameras =D
i was actually looking for a good dslr camera today depends what you want to do with your photos, i personally want a dslr for an e-portfolio, where i can easily show my friends to online problem is that i reallyy need to start saving ;p neither is *better* but it depends what you want to use them for
If you've got the money, definetely drop it on a dslr. I would. But then I'm in the digital era maaaaan.
Sorry this was a doubble post... umm I will try to say something to make it look not like a doubble post... Umm... Lets say I do not have the money on hand for an SLR Camera, but finding funding would not be impossible, would it still be beneficial to get a new digital, or would it not make a major difference to wait until the price of the DSLR Cameras drops a bit.
heres the thing you need to remember. sure a dslr is expensive, but once you spend the money for the camera, lenses, sd card, etc. your good to go. Its a large price but once you pay your set. as far as new lenses go, you can find great deals anywhere and are usually not too outragiously expensive. film cameras are cheaper and will really give you good photography skills since you have limited amounts of shots and its fully manual. the draw back is the film. if you take tons of pictures your going to end up spending so much money on more film and processing(or chemicals if you do it your self). as far as new lenses, you can get good deals most of the time, but because of the old mounts they are harder to come by, making some expensive. Most lenses arent made anymore so you need to look on ebay or garage sales. based on that, id say a dslr is a great investment. now for my biased opinion: i use a film camera because i like how its all manual. Because of this a good picture is much more satisfying because i know it was skill and knowledge(and some luck lol) that let me take it. i spend a ton of money on film and processing but i dont mind because i really have a passion for it. i also like the almost excitement of finding new lenses that are hard to come by. basically, if you have the money or can easily get it, get a dslr...if you want to gain a lot of experience and knowledge and do not mind learning how to take pictures right instead of just setting something to auto and making every shot decent, then stick with the film
Here's my stance on it: It depends on whether you like hands on, or prefer computers. Artistically, that's it. You can pretty much achieve almost anything on computer that you could in a darkroom, but if you prefer doing it all with your hands, then I'd recommend sticking with film. I personally enjoy looking at film more than digital (weird, seeing as I'm a digital photographer) unless it's black and white, in which case, I have no preference. I doubt I'd enjoy the process in the darkroom though, since I hate going into those rooms in the first place. That's why I think I'm going to stick with digital (along with the fact that photography will be my career, and digital is just easier for that). Film is great for artistic photos, but if you want to make money, digital is now the norm. Also, I think I should add that it's really the photographer, not the camera or medium, that determines the artistic level of the photos. Film tends to have a nice texture to it, and I like how the colors turn out better, and it leaves more room for mistakes during the exposure, but I can do pretty well with my digital camera too. The funny thing is that there's an obvious difference between the two. If I were to compare a newspaper from ten years ago with a current one, I could identify the old one, yellowing aside, by the fact that one has film photos, and the other digital. @Geox: it's all manual on my camera too . I don't believe in presets! Woo! I just don't have to develop photos. I only use them for white balance because my camera, sadly, does not let me choose based on the light temperature. I go in and change it later in Camera RAW though, because I prefer a more exact WB. Which reminds me... If you don't own Photoshop, then expect to invest even more. Photoshop is an absolute must for any true digital photographer. It looks like you're already set up with that though, if your renders and pen tut are anything to go by. Should start posting your renders in the prem section too I'm really too tired to make a completely coherent post, but I have the feeling that I'll forget about this topic later, so I'm leaving this post anyway
Well, from what everybody is saying here, there is really no correct answer other then preference. They both are so similar yet completely different. Its like apples and oranges, they are both fruits but the similarity (surface) stop there. I get the impression though that you guys think I am perusing this currently as a career. This is not the case, this topic is for me to see what peoples views on this are, and if we were really lucky, to finally answer the unanswerable about what is better. It would appear however, that no such an answer will ever exist.
I used to think that film cameras took higher quality photos than digitals. (Back then though, I thought all thouse DSLR's were all film cameras and the little rectangular barely thicker than a wallet cameras were the only digitals) Guess I was wrong.
It all depends on the equipment and your preference. There is no right or wrong answer, nor will there ever be, so you're correct there . Film will never stop being used, just as digital would only stop if technology itself stopped. I actually like some of the lower quality film. It gives a really neat effect and a nice soft focus .
artistic photography could be a can with a hole in it and film inside (yes thats a type of camera). anything can be artistic its what you do with the pros and cons that defends that.
