Are there any benefits of using film compared to digital

[Wayne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In earlier times, when film was the only alternative, I, of course, shot film. At that time, I did not process my own film. The advent of digital photography impacted me most significantly, not so much for what it added, but in what it took away: the expense and time of waiting for somebody else to process and deliver my photos. If, before digital, I had been asked what I liked least about photography, I would have pointed to the time and expense of processing. How could I not see digital, and its instant results, as vastly superior?

 

Taking on the hobby of processing my own film has completely overturned my previous feelings about film. For me, the benefits  now seen or sensed in film photography come almost entirely from including film processing in my photography related activities. It has added something that does not exist in my digital photography. It is strange. Processing, when done by somebody else, was seen as nothing but an obstruction to my enjoyment; when a part of my own effort, became a significant part of satisfaction.

[Doc Henry]

Wayne for my last wedding all my photos are in film , only a few in digital

Why ? the married prefer film in comparison with pictures taken by a prof with his Canon 5DII

I'll post a picture here if you like

Best

Henry

 

Thanks Henry, I would love to see such a photo. I will, of course, be taking film cameras a well. I will probably take the M9. I do love my MM1, but it is a camera that absolutely insists, at least in my amateur hands, on high contrast scenes in order to give up it's best. Add to this the fact that, again, for me, I have to shoot somewhat underexposed- when highlights are blown, it is forever- with MM1; I am not confident that my level of skill with the camera makes it a safe/wise choice for such an important event.

 

Why Wayne ? because color is more faithful and pleasant to watch. No agressivity

when watching, no "cutting" edges like in digit (too sharp) .

Believe me pictures in print are nicer in comparison post here , that's why the

married prefer film pictures versus Canon 5DII

 

In color I have this kind of picture with my M7

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Leica M7-35 Summilux Asph-Kodak Portra 400 *

 

and in b&w I have this , not with MM1 , but with a Leica MP

+ Summilux 50 Asph  and Kodak TX400**

 

 

Best

Henry

 

** and * Dev C41 by myself and TX also by myself (Kodak D76)

[Wayne]

Thank you for the shots, Henry. I know what you mean about degradation of image between print and monitor presentation. However, I like both of these just as they are.

 

Another thing that has been distracting me in this recent film binge is the negative. I look at the sleeves and sleeves of negatives and develop a real sense of substance attached to the things. It is different than looking at my wireless 2 TB hard disk. I consider just that sense of extra substance, attached to the negatives, as a benefit.

[Steve Ricoh]

Picked up a roll of Agfa Vista Plus from 'PoundLand' today, destined for a trial run in my Pentax MX. OK, it's no Leica, but it should remind me of what's possible with film.

[Doc Henry]

Picked up a roll of Agfa Vista Plus from 'PoundLand' today, destined for a trial run in my Pentax MX. OK, it's no Leica, but it should remind me of what's possible with film.

 

Hi Steve you can post and please post your pictures in film thread

Thanks

H.

[Steve Ricoh]

Hi Steve you can post and please post your pictures in film thread

Thanks

H.

I'll probably just go for D&P without paying for a scan to begin with. It's just an experiment, not ideal one admittedly, given I'm using a low quality SLR with ancient low quality optics, especially the latter.. On the off chance I manage to capture something worthwhile, I'll have it scanned.

[dunhoy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Longevity of the original: a properly processed, fixed and stored, silver halide negative will be useable 100years from now - what's the betting current digital file formats are obsolete 25years from now?

[LocalHero1953]

Longevity of the original: a properly processed, fixed and stored, silver halide negative will be useable 100years from now - what's the betting current digital file formats are obsolete 25years from now?

Same considerations apply. Most of my negatives have deteriorated as a result of storage in poor conditions (especially sticking to the envelopes, and some emulsion degradation). Kodachrome transparencies are not too bad, but they're a minority of my output. Maintaining careful storage would have avoided this, but so would maintaining careful digital image storage (swapping from floppy disks>CDs>hard disks>cloud, and from one digital format to another). Good prints (esp. b&w)  from negatives survive poor conditions better, but then so do good prints from digital media.

 

In both cases, with the emphasis on proper storage throughout their life, the images should survive 100 years.

[Doc Henry]

Same considerations apply. Most of my negatives have deteriorated as a result of storage in poor conditions (especially sticking to the envelopes, and some emulsion degradation). Kodachrome transparencies are not too bad, but they're a minority of my output. Maintaining careful storage would have avoided this, but so would maintaining careful digital image storage (swapping from floppy disks>CDs>hard disks>cloud, and from one digital format to another). Good prints (esp. b&w)  from negatives survive poor conditions better, but then so do good prints from digital media.

 

In both cases, with the emphasis on proper storage throughout their life, the images should survive 100 years.

 

Paul all my negatives are stored inside these sleeves and keep in a dry place,.and all in a binder

http://www.panodia.eu/en/consumer-area/the-album-workshop/233-tips-for-storing-slides-and-negatives

Some negatives are dating from 1968

Paul you can recover your negative by putting it in water. You have fungus ?

Best

Henry

[Paul J]

Longevity of the original: a properly processed, fixed and stored, silver halide negative will be useable 100years from now - what's the betting current digital file formats are obsolete 25years from now?

 

 

I think this is less of a concern. If you believed that the future generations had zero interest in its past then maybe.

 

My digital archive is centralised and it goes back to 1997 and it is perfectly fine. I keep a couple of hard drives offsite in a bank safe. I have had some film go missing in this period though. it's spread from file to file and is all over the place if there was a fire I would lose it all.

 

But it's obviously something we need to stay concerned about.

[Doc Henry]

I give you an appointment in a few decades , when computers, software etc... will have changed !
Not to mention the expensive equipment  renewal and cameras quickly obsolete  !
This , if you want to review your favorite photos and that your hard drives to back up (and back up again)

do not crash , like my case where a 500GB hard drive has crashed with thousands of photos of my two digital

M which disappeared !

H.

[LocalHero1953]

Paul all my negatives are stored inside these sleeves and keep in a dry place,.and all in a binder

http://www.panodia.eu/en/consumer-area/the-album-workshop/233-tips-for-storing-slides-and-negatives

Some negatives are dating from 1968

Paul you can recover your negative by putting it in water. You have fungus ?

Best

Henry

No fungus that I can see, Henry, just sticky marks, and some damage to the emulsion. Thanks for the advice, which may work for some.

 

My point is not that negatives can't be preserved, but that they will need the same care and attention by our descendants as digital ones will if they are to last 100 years.

[Doc Henry]

Paul, no fungus it's good news.

But I will again dip into the water added a few drops of dishwashing liquid and dry after.
If the gelatin is damaged, you can not recover, I agree, but sometimes by reframing with the enlarger or

scanner, we can recover part of the image.
Recover ? Not the case of my photos on hard disk that have completely disappeared  (see my post above)
It was a Western Digital (WD) 500 GB. I sent messages to WD but no answers . Since I buy another brand

Toshiba 1 To.

Rg H

[arno_nyhm]

deciding wether to use digital or analogue? to me it is only about the moment: do i want to use a microcomputer that depends on a battery and a chipcard? well, then i go for the M8. do i want to use some fine mechanic, cold metal and real film? then i go for my M2.

 

its just like deciding, which watch to wear: i got some nice 80ies Casio, Seiko or TI digital LCD watches wich i switch from time to time with my omega seamaster. all of them show the correct time. (well sometimes, when i go to the movies and wear the omega without lightnings i wonder why i didnt bring one of those illuminated casios. but then again the film runs the full time anyway and i can read the watch when the movie is over and wouldnt get out earlier just for what time it is anyway.)

 

if you are already looking for an M6, just hit the buy-button and give it a try. if you dont like it, you can sell it anytime with almost no loss.

[LocalHero1953]

Paul, no fungus it's good news.

But I will again dip into the water added a few drops of dishwashing liquid and dry after.

If the gelatin is damaged, you can not recover, I agree, but sometimes by reframing with the enlarger or

scanner, we can recover part of the image.

Recover ? Not the case of my photos on hard disk that have completely disappeared  (see my post above)

It was a Western Digital (WD) 500 GB. I sent messages to WD but no answers . Since I buy another brand

Toshiba 1 To.

Rg H

Thanks again for the advice.

 

With all due respect, I would say that keeping all your digital images on one hard disk is equivalent to the less than careful storage conditions I had for my negatives! I agree that digital failure can be catastrophic, but OTOH digital can also preserve image quality with absolutely no degradation. In both cases, we're reliant on future strangers to maintain the right conditions for preservation over a century.

[Doc Henry]

Paul , I recovered partly because saved on another hard disk but admit nevertheless that it is not practical
The film kept in sheets does not have this problem . I have some film dating from 1968 (45 years) and always nice !

I have 6 hard drives now.....that said we must not fall into paranoia of the back up !

Rg H

[Wayne]

It happened to me again this morning....I convinced myself, last evening, it imperative I re familiarize myself with M9 or MM1 and got the MM1 ready to go; even made sure a spare battery was ready to go. Got up, picked up the MM1, put it back down, and grabbed the 6x9 Royer folder, loaded with Ektar 100.

 

Whatever it is, I hope it's a benefit.

[david strachan]

"Are there any benefits of using film compared to digital"

 

 

...bragging rights, and being a very cool dude!

[mikemgb]

I just packed  my camera bag for a trip to Chicago tomorrow, it contains my D-Lux typ 109, my Leica IIIa and my Sofort, I anticipate using the IIIa most.

 

Oh, I also have a waterproof Lumix in case of rain and a Kodak F620 APS loaded with expired black and white Advantix that I am testing.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[oldwino]

I am going to attend one of the marches planned for this Saturday here in the States. I had planned on bringing my T, but now the forecast calls for some rain, so instead it will be the M4, a 35mm and Tri-X. No electronics to get wet. 

 

So in this case, advantage goes to film!