superfrog Posted March 22, 2007 Share #1 Posted March 22, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) A question for those of you who use film and digital: Do you find that you are more careful how you shoot with film than digital? In other words, do you only take a film picture if you're sure the shot will be good? I used to snap away with my CM, but now I've found I have become very cautious. Its not a habit I'm keen on, I'd rather take more shots, but somehow I feel freer with digital. Any thoughts? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 Hi superfrog, Take a look here How do you use film?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
frc Posted March 22, 2007 Share #2 Posted March 22, 2007 More concentrated, with more respect and with deeper appreciation for the result. The non-deletable nature of an image recorded on film tends to make me more aware of what i'm about to do. On digital my shooting is at a much faster pace, but, it's not yet given me more keepers per session. And for the looks, well.......... that's personal....... but I can be very persuasive about it. Perhaps it's also got to do with the fact that my film is shot with a RF and the digital is SLR. Who knows....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
George61d Posted March 22, 2007 Share #3 Posted March 22, 2007 Its true that with digital you can get sloppy, shoot off a burst of shots with bracketed exposures and sure one of them is bound to be useable. But the reality is that lighting, composition, filtration etc are the major parts to making a good photograph whether you shoot digital or film. Being able to chimp just reduces the learing curve a little - so I am a firm believer that digital induced sloppyness is more to do with the photographer than the medium i.e we let digital make us sloppy - I know cos I am as guilty as any in this regard. However coming back to film has made me change my approach to digital and I take far less photos now but have a higher success rate as I think more about the photograph. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted March 22, 2007 Share #4 Posted March 22, 2007 I used to shoot six or more rolls each weekend when I was a heavy film user, I may shoot a few more digital frames, but I don't feel I've doubled the number of frames I shoot or anything approaching that really. Even with film I would experiment with aperture and shutter speed, it's just that these days I don't have to develop and scan the films before I can see the results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted March 22, 2007 Share #5 Posted March 22, 2007 While I still am careful in my compostition whether in film or digital I do find I shoot more digital frames per particular subject. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted March 22, 2007 Share #6 Posted March 22, 2007 How do I use Film, well all the time. For something that I consider important, it must be photographed on film, as I know I have something...... POSITIVE ......and real in my hands ( like a slide). With the little Canon Digicam that I have it's for referance shots only. I get mad a little as I shake my head as this digicam is quite good but when I switch off my computer, What do I really have, well nothing, just a blank screen, and as yet cannot grasp this medium. Yes, I know, I can always print the image , but give me a break! ....... over the years I havn't spent thousands of dollars on Leica Equipment so I can look at my images on paper. Long live Slide Film. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
superfrog Posted March 23, 2007 Author Share #7 Posted March 23, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thank you all for your thoughful responses. As you observed, the permanance of film tends to make one more respectful of the pictures you take. Still, film should be fun, so this weekend I intend to get out and about (English weather permitting) and take as many pics as I can! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xray Posted March 23, 2007 Share #8 Posted March 23, 2007 I use digital in my commercial work and B&W film in my documentary. The same care goes into both. It's simply a matter of digital being more suited to my commercial clients needs and film has the look I want for my documentary. There should be no difference in how one is shot vs the other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
George61d Posted March 23, 2007 Share #9 Posted March 23, 2007 I thought about this a little further in the office today. While I shoot both media with equal care (I actuallly leave the chimp screen off by default) one thing I find very difficult to do is to go out on a shoot with both my leica and a DSLR - I always end up thinking about the camera and not the shot - "which one shall I use for this shot, what settings, oh I should h use the leica, no wait the DSLR, no wait..shot lost" - exageration of course but I do find having both formats in the bag stops me from being immersed in the subject Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrewer Posted March 24, 2007 Share #10 Posted March 24, 2007 I shoot film mostly, just snaps it seems. If I want to shoot something like a soccer game and don't mind lugging around fifteen pounds (or more) of camera/lens I'll drag out the D300 with the few long lenses I have. It is kind of a misnomer to say you shoot "only film" when many (like me) have the images put on disc immediately at the time of processing. I like to think it captures the romance and beauty of the film medium while fostering ease of display here and sharing on my website. Otherwise, I'm perfectly happy shooting architecture, people, sports, et al with my film MP and 35/50 kit. Thanks. Allan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted March 25, 2007 Share #11 Posted March 25, 2007 .... I'll drag out the D300 with the few long lenses I have. Allan, you are making all this up arent you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted March 25, 2007 Share #12 Posted March 25, 2007 These guys know http://www.emergentkiwi.org.nz/archives/writing/howdochurchesusefilm1.PDF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfspencer Posted March 25, 2007 Share #13 Posted March 25, 2007 More concentrated, with more respect and with deeper appreciation for the result. Well said! I use much more concentration when I am using film. That's not to say that the results are always better. Last Fall my wife and I went on a trip. I took my DSLR. I got one or two great photos . . . . . . but I took almost 700 pictures. When I shoot with film I might get a good photo every two or three rolls. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gberger Posted March 25, 2007 Share #14 Posted March 25, 2007 With film, one can use a quaint procedure called bracketing. The "correct" exposure isn't always the most effective, and bracketing your shots can lead to some interesting keepers. You can line up the bracketed slides on a light table and select the ones you wish to keep. With digital?? I guess you can spend hours fiddling with Photoshop to get the equivalent results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrewer Posted March 25, 2007 Share #15 Posted March 25, 2007 Allan, you are making all this up arent you! No, it's true Rob. If it makes you feel any better, the camer was given to me (by my brother). I already had the glass from my film days with a Canon EOS Elan. Thanks. Allan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frc Posted March 25, 2007 Share #16 Posted March 25, 2007 These guys know? I don't know......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandokan Posted March 26, 2007 Share #17 Posted March 26, 2007 I am new to digital - only had it for about 3 weeks. I find myself shooting much more (20 shots yesterday of my baby playing in the kitchen), when with film I would only have shot 5 or so shots. I think I got the good shot at around number 8 and a few more after that. What was good was the immediate feedback of the image as I was using a flash. I was more frugal with film due to the local costs of processing - and the Old Nag saying after the second shot "enough already" and then when each one came back, criticising each one ON: "out of focus" - ME: "no it is blurred, the baby is moving and everything else is sharp", ON: "Well its still rubbish". So when with her, I took very few photos, but on my own I would take a few more shots. With a 6x6 - boy was I frugal. I would take 2 or at most 6 shots on a days walking in the Scottish highlands - and if the weather was grey and boring, then none at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 31, 2007 Share #18 Posted March 31, 2007 I take more shots with the DMR on the R8 than I ever did when it had the film back on. Last Wednesday evening, for example, I took >300 shots, something I would never have done with film. That's the equivalent of a hundred quid's worth of slide film, burned there. I don't worry so much about B&W, since that's cheap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted April 1, 2007 Share #19 Posted April 1, 2007 The hardest thing for me is to admit the truth, but I must! Since 'proving' my M8 I have shot my best wedding ever AND my best family portrait session, ever! Why? Well I believe, against my lifes experience, I have been freed up to shoot not just what I know will work as an image, but also what I gamble may work. And mostly it did. Using film, I always had to justify the material costs to the client. Not now. Of course, there is the time spent 'processing' digital images, but that, even at the proof stage, is so superior to the analog equivalent that I don't care. At the wedding, I shot 865 images. Normally, I would have shot, maybe 150 - 200 on film. For the family series, an informal setting at the beach and in the trees on the clifftop, I shot 161 images on the M8. On film, I would have shot maybe 30 - 60, or two rolls of 35mm. In both cases, I produced more keepers than I would have shot totally on film. So how do I shoot film? Currently, not enough, but I am resolved to shoot more, but it will be purely for personal indulgence, and why not. For me, only the best is good enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Mitchell Posted April 2, 2007 Share #20 Posted April 2, 2007 I'm not a pro, but I use the two mediums in the same basic fashion. I shoot film more carefully only in that I meter and roll my memory as I would a cinomatographic shot. With digital, I may occasinally just rattle off a grab shot (I guess it's glorified as a "steeet" shot to some people) as a low-probablility photograph. I don't like to waste film or SD cards, but I will waste SD card space first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.