Question on "why film?"

[enivre]

To me, the question is like asking:

"Why use Long Playing record albums when CD is better?"

( better spell out LP in full all becos' of that #@%! TW visit :bsmilie

It is not about lower THD, not about hi-tech, not about analog vs digital, not even about $$$$... it is about sweet music, something CD is not quite able to reproduce.

Yeah audiophiles have their record players and analogue amplifiers, we have our analogue cameras.

It's all about that intangible feel... ;p

 

[FM2 User]

for the love of knowing I can shoot without the ease of a Digital Camera. Banzai!!

 

[FM2 User]

For the love of knowing I can shoot without the ease of a Digital Camera. Banzai!!

 

[kross]

i started with dslr.... now i shoot film most of the time.... the color, tone, depth, dr are just ahead of digital imo..... and of coz.... there's leica...;p

anyone got a single photo taken with film and digital for side by side comparison?
picture speaks a thousand words!

 

[maxonline]

To me, the question is like asking:

"Why use Long Playing record albums when CD is better?"

( better spell out LP in full all becos' of that #@%! TW visit :bsmilie

It is not about lower THD, not about hi-tech, not about analog vs digital, not even about $$$$... it is about sweet music, something CD is not quite able to reproduce.

i cannot listen to rock pop using a cdp...sometimes very annoying...i can only do it on LPs...

 

[fuwen]

Hmmmm..... so I am really lonely, there are still so many silm supporters even in Singapore.

However, due to time and energy constraints I only listen CDs. I think SACDs and XRCDs and the recent Hugo LPCDs are quite good already, much closer to LPs than Digital to film.

 

[bahibo]

this thread go ot i guess, just a bit, but ot.

 

[CooperS]

I sold all my digital SLRs and bought one that could make use of my M lenses.

And even with that digicam, my wife says I cheat when I start adjusting levels or curves of the images on PS.

I guess in more ways than one, she's right.

The romance of capturing the right moment (not always a human subject) is lost whenever there's a counter measure.

Digital produces great fantastic images. Film captures them.

I wouldn't compare hi fi systems (analogue or digital sounds) with cameras but I would most definitely compare cameras with watches.

Everyone knows a digital watch will always be accurate. But why are people still going for Pateks, Langes or Rolexes? :bsmilie:

 

[alternatve]

I was thinking of getting a digital camera for colour till I got my 6x6 slides back from the lab. Now, I'm contemplating a 4x5 camera! Film is indeed still viable and alive.

Samuel

 

[Verticoastro]

Why film? I tend to appreciate every individual frame (36ex) more then digital images...also, when I shoot films, I can only get 36 (35mm), 15 (120 roll film) exposure and I get lesser images to process... sometime, I don't even need to do any adjustment to the digitally scanned images at all... I like the color and mood that film produce... as for digital, it seem too perfect that it look rather fake...

I like shooting with mechnical camera because I don't have to worry about batteries, if meter fail, I can estimate using the F16 Sunny rule... I process my own B and W films and I find it more rewarding and fun doing so...

 

[Verticoastro]

i started with dslr.... now i shoot film most of the time.... the color, tone, depth, dr are just ahead of digital imo..... and of coz.... there's leica...;p

anyone got a single photo taken with film and digital for side by side comparison?
picture speaks a thousand words!

Hey, nice flickr site.. I like your B and W ...

 

[pai]

And even with that digicam, my wife says I cheat when I start adjusting levels or curves of the images on PS.

will she say you cheat if you change filter grade for contrast, change exposure or development time, dodge and burn etc in the wet darkroom? ;p are those considered "countermeasures"?

 

[clubgrit]

Well, true.

But IMHO, CD is not better. I have heard a $90k++ CD player and others compared to a $5K turntable setup, and the CD players do not sound as real, these are sterile compared to good analog. In the best hifi systems in Singapore, from $500k up to a million++, the main source is a turntable, which is the cheapest part of the system (for now, since they've already come out with $220k turntables, for the well-heeled). The same around the world.

Back to film, I use it not because of nostalgia or that I like the work involved or the smell. I simply prefer film's tonal quality, particularly in B&W which I use most often, and this alone is enough validation for me. I will still use digital, however, for its convenience.

Convenience ? I will still bring a small 35mm film camera with me when I travel, I only need to change film, not to keep track of batteries, sd/compact flash cards, downloading/backing up on a hard disk, etc. Just change the film, very easy, and 10 to 15 rolls is not heavy at all ... if 10 -15 rolls is not enough for a day, I better stick with a rapid-fire digital camera

To me, the question is like asking:

"Why use Long Playing record albums when CD is better?"

( better spell out LP in full all becos' of that #@%! TW visit :bsmilie

It is not about lower THD, not about hi-tech, not about analog vs digital, not even about $$$$... it is about sweet music, something CD is not quite able to reproduce.

 

[ckuang]

hahahah... Thought u preferred the Leitz & retired the CV 40mm and passed it to Eng Hong?

Hey Chiif, check your email, you'll know why I passed that lens over to Eng Hong.

But seriously still love film, the sad thing is that day by day it's getting harder and harder to get good scans. Like it or not, at some point it looks like I might be forced to get an M8 for work.

 

[bahibo]

closed the thread due to outtopic and personal talk like check email....etc