"Ken Hart" <kwhart1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:p7bMj.100$SR2.60@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "jimkramer" <Newsreader1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:ftr8hk$94n$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> "Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:O79Mj.1127$682.917@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> "Richard Freeman" <r-usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:iG8Mj.2669$iI3.224@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Ken Hart wrote:
>>>>> A film camera can handle those more demanding situations easily,
>>>>> simply by
>>>>> selecting the proper film. Additionally, as new films are made, you
>>>>> can
>>>>> easily "upgrade" your film camera, by selecting the newer film. As
for
>>>>> "action at a distance", there are a plethora of used telephoto lens
on
>>>>> the
>>>>> market for older film cameras.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd actually given a little thought to this. We have an old Minolta
>>>> 3000i
>>>> with a 55mm f1.7 lens lying around, and obviously we could just put
800
>>>> iso
>>>> film into it. That has to be good for at least a few f-stops...
>>>>
>>>> The main downside is the expense and inconvenience of
film/processing.
>>>> With
>>>> our digital camera we take hundreds of photos and I think nothing of
>>>> taking
>>>> candid shots. With film I just feel like I have to count every
frame.
>>>
>>> This can be a good thing, in that it stimulates the photographer to
>>> really think about what they are doing. Afterwards, when they get
back
>>> the shots and find something they like, the photographer is more
likely
>>> to remember what he / she has done to get the desired effect. With
>>> digital, it is often tough to remember just how the pic was taken --
>>> even with the EXIF
>>> data.
>>>
>> Are you sure you didn't just mix the two up? Why would it be any
easier
>> to remember how the film was shot? Unless, of course, you took proper
>> notes, but then than would help with digital too.
>
> Successful shooting with film requires a different mind set: when you
know
> that your mistakes will be preserved on film for as long as 200 years or
> more, you are more aware of the camera settings. When I go for a walk
with
> a camera, I find myself adjusting the settings as conditions change,
> whether I plan to shoot or not. Since most of my outdoor shooting is
based
> on the "sunny-16" rule, I can probably tell you what the settings were
by
> looking at the negative (with it's edge code to tell me the film type).
>
>> I still have 1/2 a roll of B&W sitting in the camera from the trip to
the
>> botanical gardens. I'm having difficulty even recalling what it was
that
>> I shot there on film.
>>
> Finish the roll and develope it, it should all come back to you.
>
>> From a creativity / learning stand point the instant feed back from
>> digital is a clear winner. If you already know how to use a camera and
>> you know what you want to do then it really doesn't make any difference
>> which you shoot, as long as you get the results you (or the person
paying
>> you) want.
>>
> Instant feedback is a crutch. As long as you know that you can just
delete
> it if it isn't right, you won't make sure that everything is right the
> first time. The only instant feedback I need is the sound of the
shutter.
> I already know that the subject is what I want when I fire the shutter.
If
> the camera makes the right sound, I know that the image is on film. When
I
> shoot, I typically shoot for at least 90% 'keepers'. With the cost of
film
> and developing at about $0.35 per shot (about the same as inkjet prints
> when you include the ink and paper), film is very economical.
>
>> Now you could become totally deranged and use your digital camera to
>> do***ent your film shooting. :-)
>> Jim
>
> That's the only use of a digital camera that makes sense to me!
>>
>>
>
>
What was your keeper rate when you were just starting/learning? What
happens to your keeper rate when you are experimenting with a new (to you)
technique or piece of equipment or a new film?
Again from a creativity / learning stand point the instant feed back from
digital is a clear winner.
If you already know how to use a camera (Granted for a lot of people that
is
a rather big if) and you know what you want to do then it really doesn't
make any difference which you shoot, as long as you get the results you
(or
the person paying you) want.
Jim
|
