On Wednesday, September 05, 2001 at 8:47, Jim Couch <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote on "Re: [OM] Re: Digital (and film) Mu," saying..
> Tom T,
>
> Slides may not be the CHEAPEST way to go. If you are willing to take a
> chance with,
> and put up with the poor quality results of the one hour or discount places,
> and buy
> off brand film then color negative film and processing is very inexpensive. A
> more
> fair comparison for me is to buy top quality consumer or pro level film and
> top
> quality processing, the total cost for print film is very high in this case.
> Some
> folks are lucky enough to have found a place that does good work cheaply,
> other are
> not. I HAD a source for good inexpensive print processing, and decent scans
> as well,
> but the last six months or so things have gone downhill and the quality is now
> unacceptable. Even at that it was still less expensive for me to shoot
> slides. I do
> spend more than you for film and processing than you, but I get pro film and
> pro
> level processing so I don't have to worry about the processor screwing up a
> roll of
> film with a once in a lifetime shot. It is easy to evaluate the results, I
> know
> immediately if I screwed up, don't have to second guess the printer.
That's pretty easy to judge from the negative, too.
Digital puts the cost of good stuff up front, but is more frangible.
> Many of us still don't scan or print ourselves. I still prefer
> slides though, as it is easy to evaluate whether a slide is worth
> scanning or not in the first place. With negative film evaluation
> is more difficult.
Maybe if you're not used to negatives.
> Latitude is narrow, and at times can be problematic, but it also give you
> creative
> control you don't always have with print film.
? I think you have more control if you use negatives & a scanner.
Change the contrast. Deemphasise things.
Digital gives you so much power, it's easy to get lost.
> As for the grain issue, I would disagree with that on two levels. The first
> is that
> there is more to life than fine grain, sharpness and acuity are equally, and
> maybe
> even more important and most people give slide films an edge here.
I think it's just the extra contrast compared to negatives.
> As for actual grain itself, I am not sure that print films have
> less grain than slide films, the best of both are excellent. It
> does seem that at very high speeds the grain is less objectionable
> in print films
>
> Print films do have some advantages - both exposure latitude and color balance
> latitude are better than slide film. There are more choices in print film,
> especially high speed stuff. If you want inexpensive prints than negative
> films have
> an advantage.
>
> I do shoot print film as well as slide film. The print film is usually used
> when I
> am photographing for someone else who will want prints or if my end product
> is going
> to consist of a lot of prints. For myself I almost always use slide film.
It's certainly more demanding of careful exposure & cropping in-
camera. Best for learning.
> As for the digital end of things...
>
> A lot of my complaints about digital are based on the fact that much of my
> photography takes place in the back country (either cycling, backpacking, or
> climbing) where access to power and batteries is an issue. four hours of
> camera
> power is nothing in a cold wet environment! When I am out for a week (which
> admittedly I don't get to do much) I could not physically carry enough
> battery power
> for a digital. Yes film is bulky and weighs a bit, but nothing compared to
> enough
> batteries to run a digital for a week! I also have the option of still
> shooting if
> my batteries do die (carrying an OM-1) and spare batteries weigh very little.
> with
> digital spares are heavy and you are dead in the water when they die.
True, for most digitals with NiCds or small batteries. I think the
Sony DSC 707 with a four-hour, 440 exposure lithium battery life
would last for a week in the field where you only take 20-30
exposures a day and don't just stand around with the camera on
waiting for the sun to change position.
An extra battery is comparable to an extra roll in size.
I think there are advantages and disadvantages to all the different
formats, from minox to 20x24 Polaroid, from slides to digital.
The most important is the vision in the photographer's head.
A camera is just a particular tool to serve that.
Tom
------------------------------------------- http://abacurial.com
tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ICQ:57647974 +1 613 291-1168 fax:594-5412
415-400 Slater St. Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7S7 N45.41694 W75.70462
*After 2001 Oct 20:758 Albert St, Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8*
,__ô Laws are the spider's webs which, if anything small falls into
_-\_<, them they ensnare it, but large things break through and escape.
(*)/'(*) -Solon, statesman (c. 638-c558 BCE)
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|