Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Digital over film

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Digital over film

    Another advantage of Digital over film.

    [photoid=318407]

    Digital seems to have a better dynamic range, if that is the right term. In other words it can cope with a greater number of stops in terms of light variation. I dont think any film would have produced such well balanced exposure as demonstrated above.

    Makes me feel Sick



  • #2


    Love that shot!

    Can't wait till I can shoot MAN.

    Comment


    • #3
      I want to live where Jid does - another great shot Jid.

      Comment


      • #4
        Another great shot, Jid!

        Indeed, a digital camera seems to have a wider dynamic range (or however this is called ... ). The difference from slide to print is clearly visible, but the difference from digital to slide is even bigger, in my opinion.

        Gerardo
        My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

        Comment


        • #5
          I really agree that digital has it advantages over film.

          (shameless plug)

          [photoid=317965]

          I don't know if i would have got this picture this well on film

          Comment


          • #6
            Digital in fact has LESS dynamic range, as well as worse saturation and exposure.

            Of course most digiphiles forget all that because they just punch up the contrast on the computer and get a decent picture as a result.

            They'll then think that the bad characteristics of digicrap are actually good things...

            Comment


            • #7
              saturation can be influenced with digital or with analog camera. With analog camera, you can change colors and saturation by using different kind of films, on digital cameras, I do the same with my post processing tools.

              In my opinion, digital cameras - at the same price range as an equivalent analog camera - have a wider dynamic range.

              Gerardo
              My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

              Comment


              • #8
                Hey Jid I must say you have some of the sharpest high res pictures I have ever seen, what setup are you currently using?

                Comment


                • #9
                  We all need to go and hang out at his garden Awesome picture!
                  Click Here for my aviation photographs.
                  No Frontiers

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by LX-A343
                    saturation can be influenced with digital or with analog camera. With analog camera, you can change colors and saturation by using different kind of films, on digital cameras, I do the same with my post processing tools.

                    In my opinion, digital cameras - at the same price range as an equivalent analog camera - have a wider dynamic range.

                    Gerardo
                    No, it's not the camera at all...
                    You're doing things outside the camera which isn't photography...

                    I can do the same things to a scanned slide, removing all your advantages.

                    Digicam photos are almost ALWAYS lacking in saturation, bland colours, and overexposed.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Not true Jwenting.
                      With a slide, you need perfect exposure to get a decent picture. There's nothing you can do to change it after you have pressed the shutter. Scanning won't get more info out of the slide. You can't lighten black for example. Try to lighten a scanned slide and see how that looks. Horrible.
                      A digital picture contains more info about the blacks, whites and everything inbetween. That's why a digital picture is much easier to edit: more dynamic range.

                      Digicam photos are almost ALWAYS lacking in saturation, bland colours, and overexposed.

                      Perhaps you have a crap monitor?? As far as I can tell, all your shots here look way too dark, overcontrasted and oversaturated.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by jwenting
                        No, it's not the camera at all...
                        You're doing things outside the camera which isn't photography...

                        I can do the same things to a scanned slide, removing all your advantages.

                        Digicam photos are almost ALWAYS lacking in saturation, bland colours, and overexposed.
                        Having scanned tons of slides end edited multiple tons of digital pics, I have to say, that a DSLR pic is way much easier to edit. On the other hand, slides are still the art of photography. It's easier to get a good digital pic then a good slide.

                        What you are talking about seems to me more of lack of post processing. Today's technology allows everybody to get a decent shot. But there are those, who can produce top quality pics, while most photographers simply kill a picture with their lack of understanding regarding post processing.

                        I suggest, you look again at Jid Webb's pic posted in the original pic. Show me a slide scan taken under the same condition with the same quality, with the same amount of different grey tones, with the same amount of details.

                        Gerardo
                        My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          No, it's not the camera at all...
                          You're doing things outside the camera which isn't photography...

                          I can do the same things to a scanned slide, removing all your advantages.

                          Digicam photos are almost ALWAYS lacking in saturation, bland colours, and overexposed.
                          What the hell are you talking about? Choosing high or low contrast paper on which to print a black and white negative...thats not photography? Giving less time or more time in the darkroom or leaving it in the developper longer, bleaching...etc...that isn't photography? What about touch ups after printing?

                          Your idiotic "F%&K Digital" rants are getting really old Jeroen...I'll be laughing at you with my 1Ds mkII making gorgeous prints and photos in a years time will you're still paying for film...

                          -Clovis

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Leftseat86

                            Your idiotic "F%&K Digital" rants are getting really old Jeroen...
                            -Clovis
                            How true
                            Just as bad as large/medium format freaks who believe 35mm isn't photography
                            Click Here for my aviation photographs.
                            No Frontiers

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Gerardo wrote
                              I suggest, you look again at Jid Webb's pic posted in the original pic. Show me a slide scan taken under the same condition with the same quality, with the same amount of different grey tones, with the same amount of details.
                              After spending the last year trying to get to grips with this hobby, attempting to make it work from prints and doing as much reading as I can, the photo above was the last straw!!!

                              I also enjoy landscape photogarphy and even in this pro Velvia world the pros are beginning to realise that a D10, D70 or 300D can produce stunning results in the right hands, which are comparable in quality to the best slides. So, what is the difference between using PS to manipulate the image rather than using warm up filters, graduated filters etc etc (which the slide shooters have to use to get the best results)? I would suggest that the unmanipulated images in digital may not look perfect in terms of saturation sharpness etc but that is intentional so as to produce a result similar to film (unfiltered). The photographer then has the power to change it to the desired effect digitally rather than by using filters.

                              From the reading I have done jwenting is wrong when he refutes the idea that digital has less dynamic range. The results speak for themselves, especially in this hobby where the light underneath the wing can be so many stops darker than that above. Perhaps the above photo was taken when the Sun was low in the sky but even so??


                              My next camera will be an Olympus E-1.. but dont ask when.

                              Meanwhile, I sit here 30 miles from Mr Webb's backyard on a lovely summers evening with that warm blue evening light and no doubt, he is out there with his G&T, steak on the barbie, taking all the best shots... Lucky ****$$""!! ( so & so)


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X