No place like home
Having switched over to digital capture now for a number of years, I have certainly learned a lot about the pluses – as well as the minuses. As much as the benefits are nice to drool over, in many ways I miss the simpler days. I never used to worry about backing up my slides, feel pressured to have the latest megapixel offering, or worry about the next generation of processing software bringing my computer to its knees. Who ever thought of the term “Digital Asset Management” when using Velvia??? I have felt there is a price to be paid for engaging in this digital madness – in ways much more than what hits your wallet.
So with that – I say hello to Velvia again and bring my ol’ F5 out of the drawer. I don’t have to worry about how much dynamic range I can get out of you – it is pretty much a fixed, known value. I don’t have to fret over how you will be processed – it is the same every time. I will have the opportunity again to forget when is the last time I had to replace my batteries. I will dust off the light table and the loupe, and look forward to the textural interface I will have again with my images. No instantaneous delete button, but the often difficult but necessary decision to banish that mounted slide to a trashcan will come back. No need for exhaustive searches of keywords to find images . I will simply pull a page of slides out of my filing cabinet and scanning through them in front of a light table. I don’t even need power to do it – I can do it by candlelight.
There is so much to be said for keeping it simple. It is time to embrace it.
@ Matt: “Daguerrotype, Calotype, collodion process, Ambrotype, and dry plate all preceded film. I think early photographers would see more similarity between roll film and digital, particularly in the ease and convenience of use, than film and the processes they used.”
Point taken. I meant film as the more dominating capture medium which in turn – for some reason – made me wonder if in today’s digital world (say the last 15 years or) if more images have been captured digitally combined than on film…after all there are no cost boundaries to digital as such (yes storage etc.). but you know what I mean.
@ Mark: I have put my film cameras up for sale now. An XpanII and a Pentax 645NII are going on Ebay these days. They have been sitting in the cupboard for far too long with far too little use.
Nice Mark. You got me. I was half way through reading all the comments on this when I had to scroll back up to look at the date. April 1st…serves me right for falling behind on the my blog reading…
That being said I still hold on to my Elan II body for some reason, even after liquidating a few older digital ones. Last time I used it was in Kuwait 8 years ago and I still wish I would have had a digital camera instead…speaking of which, where is that box of film prints & negatives?
“However I find it really hard to let go of film, the original format of this beautiful thing called photography.”
Daguerrotype, Calotype, collodion process, Ambrotype, and dry plate all preceded film. I think early photographers would see more similarity between roll film and digital, particularly in the ease and convenience of use, than film and the processes they used.
Mark…I didn’t read this until April 5th, so it wasn’t immediately apparent to me that it was an April Fool’s joke (as I didn’t read the date of the post) until I read the comments section. I was initially stunned and am now having a good laugh to see it was all in jest.
April fools huh?! Oh Mark you’re mean! I have had many sleepless nights lately of how to reclaim some processing time in front of the computer since I have been sharing room with my 8 month old daughter which has left me with no evenings to process at all!
Today, Sunday, I made the decision to cut my office desk in half and move surrender my old office to my daughter and moved into the living room (I have a HUGE L-shaped desk which was perfect to accomodate computer, printers, scanners etc.) and I have therefore SERIOUSLY contemplated selling my old XpanII and my Pentax 645NII and my two film scanners and then get myself the new 5D MKII and just go 100% digital, because truth is that those two film cameras get little exercise. However I find it really hard to let go of film, the original format of this beautiful thing called photography. On the other hand the whole idea of paying for film, paying for getting it processed and then waiting up to a minute for each slide to scan is really just silly when you think about it. I love the instant feedback of digital just as much as I love the anticipation of looking at a processed roll of film (but I hate having to wait for it to arrive). Nevertheless I struggle with the idea of not shooting a little bit of film every now and then, call it nostalgia.
However with less space on the desk maybe it’s time to go digital which would also create more space in the camera cupboard! The good news is I am able to work again in front of the computer past 7:30pm and I look forward to catching up with various blogs again, not to mention update my own blog.
But let me ask you though – do you own any film equipment still and do you ever use it?
Best regards,
Thomas
Thomas, I actually do have some film bodies left, a F5 and F100 for my underwater work – haven’t used them in years.
I never really shot film, maybe just for a year when I started out, then digital came and I tried it and never looked back.
I did want to try a large format camera once in my life just to see how it worked !!
Dude, ….. you didn’t come near foolin me with that one! 🙂
But sometimes, … I sort of miss it!!
Mark: I am only sorry I didn’t see this yesterday! My reply would have been that I was DRIVING down to see you to take that pesky digital camera off your hands. I might have even had a couple moldy old rolls of Velveeta in the freezer to trade for it! Good one. Maybe the best April Fools Post I have seen
It looks like you’ll just have to make the upgrade after all, eh? 😉
ok, now I am feeling a little guilty of my little joke because of some of the great replies here and the time you kind folks put into typing them – some as long as my post – and with much better reasoning. 🙂
Now if they’d just bring simplicity to digital cameras! How about something the size of an F3 with similar set of functions/features, a full-frame sensor, 100% viewfinder accuracy and no LCD screen, for under $1K.
Wow…Kudos to you! Personally I’m not at a point yet where I can even IMAGINE going back, but maybe someday…
Good one, Mark! I almost bit on this one! 🙂 Well played! I decided to wait until April 2nd before saying anything. LOL!
I’ve been using film for a while now, initially because of large format (4×5), but I also use a Nikon fm3a. Part of it is that the camera is so much nicer than the d300 (bigger, brighter viewfinder, more intuitive controls, smaller and more robust body), and part of it is that I don’t have to deal with a Bayer filter, so I get nice color and tonality because I use Velvia, Kodak E100G, and Ilford Delta for B&W.
Oddly, it’s also quite a bit quieter than my d300, which was surprising.
I would have thought that viewing slides “by candle-light” would have given the game away…
Hmmm….Interesting. I find the opposite to be true with digital. To me digital is the ultimate in simplicity and freedom. I also feel much less stressed about getting that important shot for the client. With digital the turn around on a 3 day assignment is usually less than a week which the client loves. I recently had a rush job that I was able to complete with the client in an hour from setting up, shooting, post processing, and emailing the finished photos to the media outlet that needed them that day. This would not have been possible with film.
There are no more storage issues. I don’t have to file all those negatives or slides, or figure out how to catalog them so that they can be more easily located. I can use keywords on the computer to instantly find the photo I need. I don’t have to worry about digital files getting scratched…etc. I always have back-ups so I don’t have that worry.
All of my current clients since 2006 require digital files, so that would mean scanning all those slides and negatives and saving them as digital files in addition to keeping the originals. So that sort of defeats the purpose of shooting film.
As far as the overall cost…I actually think it is a wash and perhaps cheaper to shoot digital. The bodies are more expensive yes, but the lenses I use are the same ones I would use on my film cameras. I would still need the computers and software plus scanners since I need digital files for clients, so no savings there. So if I shot film I would have the additional cost of processing, so I think it works out in the long run. Unless of course I processed my own which I did at one time. That might save little money…but it still costs money for equipment and supplies (which you also have to store) and time which equals money too.
I was reluctant to get serious with digital in the beginning but now I know I would not be able to go back, well at least not for my client based work. I might do it now and then just for fun…nah…who am I kidding, I haven’t touched my film cameras since 2006…I love digital.
Thought provoking post.
Haha! Good one! (Why didn’t I think of that.) Film still has it’s place, but the benefits of digital are great and plenty. I think the only way I’d go back to film (besides the plastic holga) is if I wanted to play around with large 8×10 cameras. But then I’d have to buy all the equipment to do my own processing.
Lol. What a great post. I love the blenny photo 🙂
I did wonder why I couldn’t see any recent underwater photos in your galleries, I thought you’d given up but I guess you just went digital instead?
I personally wouldn’t switch to film if you paid me. I only focus on the positives, once you have a camera/computer/software set up that works you don’t need to worry about upgrading for ages. I couldn’t think of anything worse than only having 36 shots on a dive and not even knowing that you got ‘the’ shot until a week later. As for post processing and keywording taking ages, if you hadn’t taken the time to file away your slides you’d have even more difficulty finding them than if they are digital. Plus think of all that ‘physical’ space in your house you are saving by having all those images in ‘virtual’ space on disc!
I love the velvia (and other filmic) looks so I sometimes us the Alien skin film filters to bring a bit of the good-ol-days into the modern era. If I remember correctly I used the velvia filter on a lot of the photos from my recent trip to Raja Ampat.
Also, Minna, you can always just not look at the histogram or LCD – you’d save a lot of battery power and still get more than 36 shots 😉
Going back to film. No way! If you told me I had to start using film again I would quit.
Right on! I sold my film camera when I switched to digital, so now I had to buy one to go back, but I felt it was worth it. The way I figured it is that digital made me a better photographer thanks to its instant feedback, but it also made me a bit sloppy because it’s so forgiving. So I hope that shooting film now will make me a better photographer because it will slow me down. No more relying on LCD displays and histograms, but I have to think it through before pressing the shutter!
All I need now is for the landscape to turn green. Velvia is waiting. 🙂
You’re kidding right? April Fools?
I often look at my old Olympus equipment, that took so many years to build up, and give a little melancholy sigh.
But then I burst into a grin – I remember doing hand-held, high magnification macro in the days of Kodachrome and Velvia. Sometimes there would only be 4 or 5 keepers out of a roll of 36, and you had to wait a week to find out.
I love digital and all I can do with it out of my own home.
Simplicity ain’t all its cracked up to be.
Adrian – you got me. That didn’t take long. 🙂
Great post. Simplier times sound mighty appealing. I agree there’s huge overhead associated with digital photography.
Judgement whether digital is worth it or not could depend where ones interest lies–the front end of capturing the photograph or the back end of processing to and sometimes beyond creative limits.
I find myself divided 50/50 on this. I love taking photographs and strive for end results that can stand on their own. But, I also love carefully pushing/processing a digital photo–striving for closer representation of what I was seeing and feeling at the time.
Digital provides both parts, but as you said, at the cost of complexity. As always, life’s full of compromise. 🙂