BurgaFlippinMan
New Member
Film will most prolly wont die, but turn into a niche
increasing number of people selling off their D70 in less than a few months?
- Thread starter swimcraze
- Start date
- Status
BurgaFlippinMan said:
No doubt. I think what he is trying to say is, film is dead for the masses (in developed countries at least.) Those hobbists and professionals with certain needs will keep it alive for a long long time.
With that said. Why does film and slides have to be so costly? I mean just the cost of the film itself, not processing and printing. It's a century old technology. But it still cost so much for 36 exposures?
scanner said:
Totally agree, I uses my D70 whenever possible when i'm out field but in my bag, i stuff away 1 BnW film loaded on my Rangefinder camera. i'm not sure anyone here know how to use one, it's totally manual, viewfinder seperated from lens and dun need a battery to work. I just love to study my object, lighting condition and distance before shooting. in D-photography, i shoot without thinking.
if u ask me which i prefer, i'll say both are as important to a photographer. I'm not a pro as i dun earn my living taking photos but if u r asking me which is more fun, D-camera or SLR/manual camera? i'll say SLR becos DSLR is too easy, no learning curve at all. But that's just me as i earn my living using PS for more then 8hrs a day on a PC, trying to make the colours of fruits and other stuff look nice, vibant and bright so that you people will buy.
Just to highlite abit here, for me, i pay more attention on the composition of image in D-photography but more attention are given to the technical basic of photography in SLR/manual RF cam. i think it's good to be well verse in both.
Hmmm I took the other way, I picked up digital first then went to film :bsmilie:
:thumbsup: Agree with you on the pro pro comment. :devil:scanner said:Correction! Film wll not die off so easily.
For example, can digital B&W prints (in general) get as good result as a B&W prints developed from a film?
There are still markets for film... don't jump into conclusion so fast.
bernards said:
yes, no doubt its a century old technology.. but the cost of producing film and slides will increase significantly when the volume isnt there anymore.. economies of scale bro... so the high cost have to be passed on to consumers..
just like pagers... in spore it has started to become a niche market.. only doctors & few others still use it perhaps.. and the cost of new pager has actually gone up a lot because no one wants to manufacture them anymore.. everyone uses HP nowadays..
smallaperture
Senior Member
Apart from spending on film to learn, there are other ways like reading up, attending courses and learning from buddies and friend and from threads here in CS. But nothing beats practical experience.
Now, there are 2 things that is a no-no in film, in today's context - using bracketting and continuous shooting or machine-gunning. Each bracketting cost you 3 frames. You would be spending time changing rolls rather than shooting. At one time, there used to be some adapter that takes roll of film that contains more than the max of 36 frames and motor drive that goes with it, almost like a movie cam!
For amateurs, 2 to 3 rolls for each outing ain't that excessive, if you take it as your learning process, and while you're at it, hopefully, you get a few wonderful shots.
Someone wanted to compare vinvl to CD. Audio CDs are in every way superior to audio. Here, in photodom, digital hasn't quite arrived yet, far from it. Film is still king in terms of resolution, in terms of sharpness, dynamic range, and probably in some other attributes as well. In 5 years time, maybe, when Full-frame dSLR become mainstream, and even tiny digicam sells for 200 bucks or so, film might be relegated to some arty-farty folks using slides or some B+W film. Yeah, got the word for it - Niche use.
Now, there are 2 things that is a no-no in film, in today's context - using bracketting and continuous shooting or machine-gunning. Each bracketting cost you 3 frames. You would be spending time changing rolls rather than shooting. At one time, there used to be some adapter that takes roll of film that contains more than the max of 36 frames and motor drive that goes with it, almost like a movie cam!
For amateurs, 2 to 3 rolls for each outing ain't that excessive, if you take it as your learning process, and while you're at it, hopefully, you get a few wonderful shots.
Someone wanted to compare vinvl to CD. Audio CDs are in every way superior to audio. Here, in photodom, digital hasn't quite arrived yet, far from it. Film is still king in terms of resolution, in terms of sharpness, dynamic range, and probably in some other attributes as well. In 5 years time, maybe, when Full-frame dSLR become mainstream, and even tiny digicam sells for 200 bucks or so, film might be relegated to some arty-farty folks using slides or some B+W film. Yeah, got the word for it - Niche use.
smallaperture said:
Reading and attending courses only gives you the theory. Practice is a whole different ball game.. The best way to learn is still to experiment.. and burn those shutter counts.. Thats why after attending a course.. what do they are you to do.. go out and practise..
gadrian said:
I think the general concern is that with digital, the experimentation may evolve into taking pot shots. I was at Sentosa over the weekend, and saw 2 wedding photographers taking pics for a couple. Both photographers kept taking "test" shots while looking at the LCD after each shot. This practice lasted for about 3-4 shots before that ACTUAL picture was taken.
Granted that wedding photos are important enough not to screw up, but what are we learning here? It is obvious that these two photographers do not understand their equipment, nor trust themselves.
PLRBEAR said:I think the general concern is that with digital, the experimentation may evolve into taking pot shots. I was at Sentosa over the weekend, and saw 2 wedding photographers taking pics for a couple. Both photographers kept taking "test" shots while looking at the LCD after each shot. This practice lasted for about 3-4 shots before that ACTUAL picture was taken.
Granted that wedding photos are important enough not to screw up, but what are we learning here? It is obvious that these two photographers do not understand their equipment, nor trust themselves.
Ehh.. even when shooting on film.. many wedding photographers.. in this case.. (especially those wedding portraits).. and photographers of other areas also take lots of test shot.. especially if they are med format users.. hence the reason for polaroids.
Taking test shots and taking pot shots are very different.
gooseberry
Senior Member
Gymrat76 said:
Hehe.. it's like playing "chinese wispers" - after 92 posts, the current topic being discussed is totally different from the original.
I put mine on http://www.ebay.co.uk/ including a 28/80 nikkor lens (both in very good condition - with a bid time of 7 days and a buy now price of £220 English Pounds , it sold in less 2 hours and I had around 30 e-mails enquiring about it .
They cant be that bad with this level of interest.
ps - only sold it because I have a mint F70 and now a F90X as well.
sorry forgot to put finished sale price - unit sold at £525
They cant be that bad with this level of interest.
ps - only sold it because I have a mint F70 and now a F90X as well.
sorry forgot to put finished sale price - unit sold at £525
Gymrat76 said:Wow! :bigeyes: I should ship the lens to you to sell at £525, just give me £450 and you keep the rest!
Have at look at the e-bay site under - photography - theres a quite a few bargains to be had as well , you can e-mail the sellers about sending equipment to other countries ,if your genuine and are willing to sort the deal by personal cheque, money order or paypal a few of the the serious ones will oblige .
D2Hpeter
New Member
novaD70 said:
cool it guys, this fellow is just trying to get attention. Just simply ignore him and just enjoy our D70. It is democratic in singapore. I could buy a Jaguar and keep at home to enjoy even if I didn't hv a driving licence. Similarly, one could also buy a D70 and just hang around their neck and show off by walking along orchard rd even if he knows nuts about photography. Nothing is wrong with that. :nono:
D2Hpeter
New Member
Gymrat76 said:I think you're missing out an important fact against your argument on why lots of newbies have flocked to DSLRs instead of film SLRs in the past: It doesn't cost you money to just shoot and experiment with a DSLR. Lots of people (myself included) just didn't want to bother with the cost and hassle of buying and developing film. It was a (comparatively) expensive way to learn, as like everyone says, in order to to get better you just have to shoot more. With DSLRs you can just take as many pictures as you like and the only limitation would be the size of your CF card, or your motivation ;p
This fact alone justifies getting a DSLR to learn and pick up photography, IMHO, of course
Cheers
GYR
I definitely agree with this...initially I got a Prosumer level CP5700 for this objective but it has limitation on responsiveness. The D70, IMO, is the best tool for this purpose. No regrets in spending the $. And I do keep my film slr as well.
- Status
Similar threads
