The poor old beast I am talking about is the one you were riding, and it fell down a couple of pages ago...
(By the way, there is no law against owning two or more cameras in various formats, including 35mm. That way you will have the best tools for the various jobs that you may need to do.)
Please don't kill me but I would never go back to 135 simply because ((anyone offended by D-blasphemy please stop reading)) DSLR's are just too good to be denied these days. To me there's no point staying with film if you're going to shoot small. Okay... waiting to be banned now.
SomeOtherGuy said:But if you're looking to enlarge to 20x24, and not have very obvious grain from a common viewing distance, 35mm is just not going to fill the bill.
Should i offer to explain it again after all?
No thanks - I only have so many years left on this earth
Your response to me...
I think you're totally missing the point. Film isn't entirely about sharpness. Analog mediums are incredibly expressive and non-linear in response - each with their own character. It's definitely annoying how often people ignore this vastly important trait. Ever check the contrast or HD curves of the latest DSLRs? Ever look at their toe and shoulder response curves? Of course you haven't - they work only in the linear response realm - with no inherent ability (other than electricity) to saturate the input signal. That is a huge part of the look of film - sharpness is merely an aspect of the process and grain-size.
Please remember that quite a significant amount of world-changing photographs and bodies of work were/are done with 35mm film.
Not everything has to be about the sharpest rendition of rocks on a hill complete with dramatic skies. There ARE other important fields of photography, focusing on the human element, that don't require utmost sharpness - but definitely benefit from film.
--------------------
Your response to another poster...
Huh? People don't view 20x24s at the same distance they view 8x10s. Try again.
That stated, not everyone cares about or even likes that much detail. Heck, this is why painters such as Monet and Van Goch are popular with their impressionistic styles. If they were photographers they probably would have shot with 135 and Petzvals.
This discussion seems to be going off in some totally tangential directions. If the purpose is to have an intelligent discussion on these other subjects, I suggest starting a different thread. Right now it's hard to make any sense of the discussion!
Nope.
But on the other hand, if every artist did not want to think about and discuss why and how they create their art, would they be on APUG?
Yet another topic for another thread....
[...]I come here for more technical reasons, personally.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?