It wasn't a slur. I meant it literally. I have no idea what you mean about the difference between a negative and RAW file. And the RAW file being an embryo that develops. But you're right, all this digi-talk should be on DPUG.
You drove a coach and horses through that rule when you said "Digital colours jump between steps defined by the bit depth of the image. The bit depth of modern images is so large that it appears continuous...until you make edits to the image which compresses them and the steps become more obvious (banding)".
You can't have it both ways, you have to choose between general slurs or objective facts.
I gave you the benefit of the doubt before, and thought your responses were merely curmudgeonly. Now I'm sure the intention is trolling.Funny how people get so irate when you poke fun at their shiny, expensive toys! LOL
I gave you the benefit of the doubt before, and thought your responses were merely curmudgeonly. Now I'm sure the intention is trolling.
How can you point out the deficiencies of the digital medium without illustrating what they are? When someone addresses your observations, you say the response belongs on DPUG. Sorry, I'm not buying FujiLove, I think you're trolling and you will show it conclusively, sooner rather than later. Everyone here likes film photography, your opinions are nothing special. My most expensive shiny toy is a Leica film camera.My intention was no more than to point out the deficiencies of the digital medium, equipment and processes as I see them, and express how I feel about how photography (among other things) has become almost entirely digital these days. Yes, I do find it funny that people get upset when you point out that their expensive new toys are no better than something that's fifty years old, cost a tenth of the price, and will outlast the shiny toy.
I can't say I appreciate being called a troll, but I've been called a lot worse! Sorry if my strong opinions have offended you.
How can you point out the deficiencies of the digital medium without illustrating what they are? When someone addresses your observations, you say the response belongs on DPUG. Sorry, I'm not buying FujiLove, I think you're trolling and you will show it conclusively, sooner rather than later. Everyone here likes film photography, your opinions are nothing special. My most expensive shiny toy is a Leica film camera.
You not only want to control the debate, you want to control the terms of the debate. My impression is you're a person who is never wrong, and you re-write the backstory until you come out looking shiny. Your user name suggests you're a fan of the old 601 to 901 series Fujis - which makes you unusual - or a Fuji digital user - which does not.Blinking heck, calm down son.
Whoever said my opinions are anything special? I've said time and again that I was expressing how I feel about digital photography. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems like a normal thing to do on a photographic forum. No? I realise most people probably don't share my views. Great! Let's debate them. I don't understand how that's wrong or makes me a troll. I thought trolling meant writing things that are untrue deliberately to wind people up or to use abusive/foul language etc? If I've broken some forum rule here by talking about these things then I'm sorry, and I won't post anything else, but I really don't understand what the problem is.
I have no issue with you disagreeing with me. I enjoy having a debate. But I think it's very unfair to suggest I shouldn't contribute an opinion because you don't happen to like it, then use the troll label to shut me up.
You not only want to control the debate, you want to control the terms of the debate. My impression is you're a person who is never wrong, and you re-write the backstory until you come out looking shiny. Your user name suggests you're a fan of the old 601 to 901 series Fujis - which makes you unusual - or a Fuji digital user - which does not.
This forum takes a dim view of film vs digital debates because they are open to precisely the kind of junk vs brilliant stereotypes you've indulged in all the way through the thread. Until you show you have more to offer the discussion, I shall continue to assume your stance is simply to provoke.
What makes digital 'better' for those specialist applications often isn't that the final image is higher quality or more pleasing, but that it's easier. Simple as that.
no i am specifically talking about film versus digital, and all the BS entwined with the argument that one is better or easier than the other.I guess that would be anyone who reads a magazine, blog, newspaper or book? Or watches TV, movies, documentaries...
You can add attention seeking to your list.Please continue with your strange forum-based psycho analysis of me. It's thoroughly entertaining!
You can add attention seeking to your list.
OK....in terms of hours behind the camera, regardless of how old you are or how long you have been engaged in your hobby, I know for a fact that I have, as a full time working professional, exponentially more experience than you in either the film or digital medium.
So I can say with utter confidence that this is so mind boggling wrong, it has left me nearly speechless.
Even though I am 99% a black and white user in film who wet prints, I have and use a little bit of color negative and transparency film in 35mm, 120mm and 4x5 formats. I would use a **lot** more if color d_g_tal were not absolutely incredible in it's out of camera, no adjustments needed result in the printed form. We are talking anything and everything here too, magazine articles, double page ads to billboards up to 30 feet wide, some at 10 feet wide x 300 dpi as a native resolution.
You can certainly have an opinion about the other medium in photography if you like and are most welcome to it. But to bleat out the above as any kind of fact is just off...way off. Just so you know I am not anti color film, I love this guy's work on Portra, it is all he shoots and his client list & awards are legion:
Dead Link Removed
Get a grip folks, we are all in this together and more people than you realize love film and are using more of it for all kinds of reasons.
Film is not dead and digital is not junk, end of story as far as I am concerned.
In my case, I find that the expense of material, time and attention required to create and process a satisfying film-based photo generally results in a much deeper appreciation for the form and content of the finished picture than I might experience with a purely digital image. It's rather like the difference between reading a book and watching a television show.
Also for me, a mechanical film camera is much more enjoyable than an electronic device to hold in my hands, look through the finder, push the buttons, turn the knobs and listen to the sounds. I note that some of the newer 'retro' digicam designs are starting to address these unquantifiable haptic needs.
I'm referring to the general use photography that most hobbyist do where I see no great advantage of digital apart from the fact that everything is very easy. It's easy to take a photo because many cameras are highly automated and it's easy to manipulate photos with software.
Even in that vein, I am not in agreement. But I care about this site's dedication and collective passion for film and related process more than I do than "enlightening" those who which I do not agree with.
So I will leave it at that.
I'm referring to the general use photography that most hobbyist do where I see no great advantage of digital apart from the fact that everything is very easy.
if digital photography is so easy, why is it so hard to make a great digital photograph ?
maybe it is easier to share a digital image, but making them is easier ? not sure how true that is or isn't
if digital photography is so easy, why is it so hard to make a great digital photograph ?
maybe it is easier to share a digital image, but making them is easier ? not sure how true that is or isn't
Indeed.The medium is irrelevant; it’s the capture that is the difficulty.
The medium is irrelevant; it’s the capture that is the difficulty.
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?