Analog vs. Digital - When to pick what?

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 12/14/2022 at 1:08 AM, altphoto said:

if you don't have a darkroom at your disposal, I think it's better to stay in the digital world; analogue only makes sense when you print your negatives in the darkroom; scanning the film is just working back in a digital world and then what is the point of film; by the way, to be able to scan a film properly, you need to develop the film for less time and you can no longer make decent prints of it,

BS, fake news, conspiracy theory. You clearly base your opinions on Chinese whispers. 

[FrozenInTime]

7 hours ago, Mikep996 said:

"in the main, sunny 16 only works because of the wide latitude of modern negative films"

"Modern" in this case would probably be negative film from the 1930's onward!  

Re "exposure meters" ...  my uncle had a camera - don't recall what brand - that had a small, rectangular translucent screen as part of the structure at the bottom of the camera that you could look through.  The screen was graduated in light transmission from left to right and had the camera F stops listed within the screen.  You would look through the screen and, based on the amount of light, you could see some/all of the F-stops.  The correct f stop for the exposure was the highest number stop you could see.

An extinction meter ?  http://www.earlyphotography.co.uk/site/meters.html 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[lmans]

Wow.... more complicated than what I might make it but an interesting article! 

[Jay66]

I have my M3, M4, M5, M6 TTL and M7. I’m getting lazy in my old age and using the M7 suits me best as I never gave up film, even though my wife has a ton of Canon digital gear, I rarely use it. It’s all what you’re comfortable with. The cost of film and processing has me cutting down on how many frames I shoot.

Edited January 16, 2023 by Jay66

[lmans]

Cutting down on number of frames is good.....slow down...be selective. Take images that mean something and have impact as opposed to snapshots that belong in a travel magazine

[ktmrider2]

And if the weather or light sucks, use digital!

[Borna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My two cents comes down to printing. With analog you have to always print, while digital you just store your photos in a hard drive an ale, its there for the next 10 years and nobody sees them. I think it is in its most importance to start printing photographs, 10x15, A4, A3 etc. at home.

To get the feeling of having your photographs in your hand, as it was before. When it comes to quality of photo, analog vs digital. Sure, a very modern, sharp and fast lens on a new digital M-house gives a totally perfect photograph, while to be honest, M8, M9 and Monochromes, M-P/240 on some older lenses, push some ISO, you will get fantastic and organic results soul,  when printing, by seeing your craft in your hands. 

Start printing. I believe that is the key to fully enjoy digital. However, it does not hurt to have a analog camera too. To enjoy the process and weird quirks of film. 

Sorry for the bump. 

[Mr.Prime]

I use a hybrid workflow too. One of the overriding reasons is because I find that digital cameras are for me, not nearly as inspiring to use. I don’t like menus and displays. If there were digital cameras which operated like film cameras do then I’d likely switch back to digital.

[a.noctilux]

1 hour ago, Mr.Prime said:

I don’t like menus and displays. If there were digital cameras which operated like film cameras do then I’d likely switch back to digital.

Leica offered one M family as "film-like" as possible: M60 the purest LCDless, M-D, etc.

I use M-D (typ 262), when I'm lazy.

[cj3209]

These posts made me laugh...almost like which one is 'better.'  There is no better:  just the one you want to use.  I'm grateful to have both options and love both. 

Just need to find more time to make art and capture moments.

Cheers!