Date: 2008-01-18 06:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] malaheed.livejournal.com
Erm...as in
which do you use? or which is better? or which do you prefer?

Date: 2008-01-18 06:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] vescoiya.livejournal.com
I thought you were asking which one the camera in your icon was... sorry.

What are you going to use it for? I mean unless you need massive enlargement of pictures the resolution on digital is more than ample. Also, do you have a lot of old lens and if so, which brand? As most of the time you won't be able to use slr lens on a new digital slr body. Unless you've got a canon camera where they deliberately made them compatible.

Date: 2008-01-18 08:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lil-shepherd.livejournal.com
I use my Pentax lenses from my SR7 on my new K10. It's the reason I stuck with Pentax.

Date: 2008-01-18 11:21 pm (UTC)
ext_189645: (Default)
From: [identity profile] bunn.livejournal.com
I thought you were asking which one the camera in your icon was... sorry.

I thought that too!

Digital all the way here. Film far too much hassle, too expensive, too slow (in terms of being able to see the results and improve technique based on them).

Date: 2008-01-18 06:44 pm (UTC)
ext_73044: Tinkerbell (Default)
From: [identity profile] lisa-marli.livejournal.com
I always forget to take the film in for developing. Still have some, even though the trip was years ago.
So I went digital. At least now i can't Not get the pictures to hang around someplace.
Now all I need to do is upload them onto flicker so that the friends can see them.

Date: 2008-01-18 06:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tigerfort.livejournal.com
The fact that I can carry enough digital 'film' for several hundred photos without any problems is a nice bonus.

Date: 2008-01-18 07:35 pm (UTC)
tree_and_leaf: Watercolour of barn owl perched on post. (Default)
From: [personal profile] tree_and_leaf
Pragmatically, I have gone over to digital, because it's so much easier and cheap to share pictures.

However, I still have a hankering for doing my own b&w printing (not that I have access to a darkroom just now...)

Date: 2008-01-18 08:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lil-shepherd.livejournal.com
It's a hard choice. Digital means you can discard all the bad photos, have another go if you've made an error, and adjust the white balance more easily.

Film is still higher quality for big blowups. Film does not degrade in the same way as copying digital files does. On the other hand, I've been having my films transferred to disc at the same time as they are developed and printed for years, and its the discs that I use...

I still own my film SLR and will no doubt continue to use it in certain circumstances. However, the digital SLR has replaced it for practical purposes.
Edited Date: 2008-01-18 08:35 pm (UTC)

Date: 2008-01-20 05:54 pm (UTC)
ext_27570: Richard in tricorn hat (Default)
From: [identity profile] sigisgrim.livejournal.com
Film does not degrade in the same way as copying digital files does.

I suspect that we're talking about different things here, but simply copying a digital image shouldn't cause any degradation at all. However, opening a JPEG image in an image editing application and then saving it again as another JPEG will degrade it as JPEG is a lossy format. (PNG & TIFF don't suffer from this problem.)

Date: 2008-01-18 08:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-marquis.livejournal.com
You didn't leave an option for both ...

Date: 2008-01-18 10:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-marquis.livejournal.com
Incidentally the poll answers don't show that I voted for both, because I will happily use both.

Date: 2008-01-19 03:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] philmophlegm.livejournal.com
For my photography purposes (mostly taking photos of drunken accountants - see www.clareassoc.co.uk/kpmg), a little digital compact is perfect.

Going on my Dad's experience, it seems that while pros often use film, serious amateurs all seem to use digital now. He's a member of a local photographic society and was in another one when he lived in Wrexham, and says that all the serious amateurs he knows use digital almost exclusively now.

Date: 2008-01-20 05:52 pm (UTC)
ext_27570: Richard in tricorn hat (Default)
From: [identity profile] sigisgrim.livejournal.com
it seems that while pros often use film, serious amateurs all seem to use digital now

That's interesting, about four years ago I was speaking with a couple of professional press photographers. They were saying that they'd been using digital for well over ten years while amateurs were only just starting to catch up with using digitals.

Date: 2008-01-21 12:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] philmophlegm.livejournal.com
Four years ago would be about right. My Dad went over to the digital side a bit before that.

I also think you're right about press photographers - the ease of getting the photo in to the office from location means that they were probably early adopters of digital. But I think that there are still portrait photographers, fashion photographers, landscape photographers etc still using film. Many of these types probably never went over to SLR and are still using big expensive medium format Hasselblads and the like anyway.

Date: 2008-01-21 05:25 pm (UTC)
ext_27570: Richard in tricorn hat (Default)
From: [identity profile] sigisgrim.livejournal.com
I understand that Hasselblad produce the highest Megapixel cameras available. But I suspect you're right about the portrait photographers, etc.

Profile

wellinghall: (Default)
wellinghall

January 2026

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627 28293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 7th, 2026 04:59 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios