Who said film was dead?
- Thread starter Ned
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
S
seilerbird
Guest
Well Ned here is what you said "I'm afraid that digital photography has produced a generation of mediocre photographers that feel quantity trumps quality." Now if you had said "a lot of mediocre photographers" then I would have agreed with you. But what you said attacks all digital photographers, so it is about me.
Who was the greatest film photographer of all times? For my money it is Ansel Adams. And no one manipulated a print more than he did. In his later years he ever took to baking his prints in a microwave oven to achieve the effects he was looking for. He is truly the Godfather of Photoshop.
But the reason I think that digital has produced a lot of mediocre photographers is because so many don't post process. Take a look at the photography in a 50 year old National Geographic and then take a look at the images you see on the photography web sites. The photos of today are 1000 times better than they were 50 years ago for my money.
Who was the greatest film photographer of all times? For my money it is Ansel Adams. And no one manipulated a print more than he did. In his later years he ever took to baking his prints in a microwave oven to achieve the effects he was looking for. He is truly the Godfather of Photoshop.
But the reason I think that digital has produced a lot of mediocre photographers is because so many don't post process. Take a look at the photography in a 50 year old National Geographic and then take a look at the images you see on the photography web sites. The photos of today are 1000 times better than they were 50 years ago for my money.
A browse of any of the public photo web sites will turn up the products of those mediocre photographers that I referred to. A good photographer will take good pictures regardless of the equipment used, film or digital. Ansel Adams was no doubt one of the great photographers, but his post processing was only possible because he shot in black and white. I did my share of dodging and burning in the enlarger, so I know how he did what he did.
The mediocre photographers I was speaking about are those that take a dozen photos of cats doing what cats do, dogs doing what dogs do, babies doing what babies do, and thinking that a dozen photos are more interesting than one well framed shot.
We as RVers, are blessed in being able to spend time in the most beautiful places in our country, our continent, and our world. As a result, the photos we take are a cut above what the average point and shoot picture taker gets. Photos are more than the effects, the most important quality is the subject. If the subject is boring, the photo is boring. I would much rather see a photo of an alligator in Florida, a Grizzly in Yellowstone, or a Condor in the Grand Canyon than yet another picture of a sleeping cat.
Sorry if you took it personally, but as I said, it's not all about you. It's about the army of point and shooters that think every shot they make is worth someone's time to look at. We have many very talented photographers here, and we're all fortunate to be able to share in their work. I don't think any of them are mediocre, but, as I said, we have great subject matter to photograph. One of the big advantages of the modern digital camera is that we can take good photos that don't need any post processing. With attention to framing when taking the picture, very few photos need any retouching when taken with a good camera. I don't miss having to concern myself with f-stops, shutter speeds, and ASA numbers. I'm still conscious of them, but find the camera does a good job of handling the settings for me in most instances.
The mediocre photographers I was speaking about are those that take a dozen photos of cats doing what cats do, dogs doing what dogs do, babies doing what babies do, and thinking that a dozen photos are more interesting than one well framed shot.
We as RVers, are blessed in being able to spend time in the most beautiful places in our country, our continent, and our world. As a result, the photos we take are a cut above what the average point and shoot picture taker gets. Photos are more than the effects, the most important quality is the subject. If the subject is boring, the photo is boring. I would much rather see a photo of an alligator in Florida, a Grizzly in Yellowstone, or a Condor in the Grand Canyon than yet another picture of a sleeping cat.
Sorry if you took it personally, but as I said, it's not all about you. It's about the army of point and shooters that think every shot they make is worth someone's time to look at. We have many very talented photographers here, and we're all fortunate to be able to share in their work. I don't think any of them are mediocre, but, as I said, we have great subject matter to photograph. One of the big advantages of the modern digital camera is that we can take good photos that don't need any post processing. With attention to framing when taking the picture, very few photos need any retouching when taken with a good camera. I don't miss having to concern myself with f-stops, shutter speeds, and ASA numbers. I'm still conscious of them, but find the camera does a good job of handling the settings for me in most instances.
Molaker
Well-known member
Tom & Ned, does this mean neither of you want my Canon EOS IX Lite?
Molaker said:
Sorry, I would swap for my XE7 but I sold that a long time ago, along with the lenses. Now if you had a Speed Graphic 4x5, I'd take you up on the offer. That was the first professional grade camera I used. But I'm not sure I can get 4x5 cut film any longer.
S
seilerbird
Guest
I don't wish to knock film cameras. They certainly had their place in time. And I certainly loved taking a the thousands of shots I took on film. One the problems is there so few places to get the images developed and the cost is very high. One 16 gig SD card costs less than the price of buying and processing a roll of 36 exposures. I can get hundreds of thousands of images on one SD chip by recording and erasing over and over.Molaker said:
Of course the biggest problem is you have to use the old "I hope that one comes out" expression every time you take a shot. Then wait a week for it to come back from the developer. This means that you have to take notes about your time of day, exposure, etc and then if it doesn't come out you have to figure out what went wrong so you can learn and hopefully not make the mistake again. The instant feedback of digital makes it so much easier to improve your techniques a lot faster. And the ease of post processing makes it easy to correct mistakes after the fact. You can't do that with slide film.
One of the silliest things I hear about digital is that people use post processing to make bad shots good. Nothing could be further from the truth. Post processing is to make great shots greater. You can't fix out of focus or shaken shots in post processing.
PancakeBill
Well-known member
Fun read. BTW, Ranger friend of mine here at Yellowstone uses 4x5 cut film. So, you can buy and process it, but as discussed, it is expensive.
I have shot tons of film, and back when digital first came out was asked if it would ever take over film, my response was not for a long time, and even then there will be holdouts. Same as audio, there are still vinyl holdouts. However, there no longer seem to be holdouts for wax cylindars. At some point maybe vinyl will disapear and some time later so will film, other than as a display. Situations like some KodaChrome discovered stored away, shot in a found 35mm SLR, and the chemicals discovered to process it. Like the original post. That film is qualified for SS today!!
Processing, it was my part time job when I was in country, teaching folks how to develop film. We had slide and B&W processing at the photo hobby shop on base.
I had a dark room in my first house, did both the slides and B&W, godging, burning, cropping etc. Multi images, all sorts of fun stuff.
Is film dead? Not yet, but it is on life support.
I have shot tons of film, and back when digital first came out was asked if it would ever take over film, my response was not for a long time, and even then there will be holdouts. Same as audio, there are still vinyl holdouts. However, there no longer seem to be holdouts for wax cylindars. At some point maybe vinyl will disapear and some time later so will film, other than as a display. Situations like some KodaChrome discovered stored away, shot in a found 35mm SLR, and the chemicals discovered to process it. Like the original post. That film is qualified for SS today!!
Processing, it was my part time job when I was in country, teaching folks how to develop film. We had slide and B&W processing at the photo hobby shop on base.
I had a dark room in my first house, did both the slides and B&W, godging, burning, cropping etc. Multi images, all sorts of fun stuff.
Is film dead? Not yet, but it is on life support.
S
seilerbird
Guest
When I stay at a place like the Grand Canyon that is overrun with tourists I see hundreds of cameras every day. I might see one film camera out of all that I see in one day. The key word is "might". Many days I see zero.
I have some friends of mine that run an eBay business selling vinyl records. Before they started I was giggling at the idea of trying to make a living selling records. Albums did not go into mass production until the 60s and they stopped making albums in the late 80s, so there is only 20 years of music on vinyl to choose from. Yes, there are albums from the 50s but they are few and far between and usually beat to death being played with a 10 penny nail. Yes there were albums made in the 90s but they are even fewer and farther between. I thought the business was doomed to failure before it started. I could not have been more wrong. They are doing sensational. The prices that are being paid for classic albums is stupid. And business is really good in the poorer countries that haven't fully embraced CDs yet. Business is especially good in Japan and Europe. They are able to buy large quantities of records at 50 cents apiece or less and the average record sells for $10 or more. And notice I did not say "if it is in good condition". Even the ones in poor condition sell.
I have some friends of mine that run an eBay business selling vinyl records. Before they started I was giggling at the idea of trying to make a living selling records. Albums did not go into mass production until the 60s and they stopped making albums in the late 80s, so there is only 20 years of music on vinyl to choose from. Yes, there are albums from the 50s but they are few and far between and usually beat to death being played with a 10 penny nail. Yes there were albums made in the 90s but they are even fewer and farther between. I thought the business was doomed to failure before it started. I could not have been more wrong. They are doing sensational. The prices that are being paid for classic albums is stupid. And business is really good in the poorer countries that haven't fully embraced CDs yet. Business is especially good in Japan and Europe. They are able to buy large quantities of records at 50 cents apiece or less and the average record sells for $10 or more. And notice I did not say "if it is in good condition". Even the ones in poor condition sell.
