No Love affair with Digital (Thread moved)

[Vaughn]

What does love have to do with it? (unless you sleep with your long lenses...)

 

[macfred]

What does love have to do with it? (unless you sleep with your long lenses...)

Size doesn't always matter ...

 

[SilverShutter]

I personally both love the technological advances of my digital system (micro4/3rds) but also the simplicity and process of film. I think they perfectly go hand in hand and compliment each other where the other can't. There's times throughtout the year though where I'm more inclined to one medium over the other, which further justifies having them both.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Photography is communicating. Most people communicate with email. Some write letters. There’s noting wrong with doing both. I use mostly email, but it’s also good just to slow down and write a letter. Anybody receiving a handwritten letter feels something different than getting an email. Photography is not much different.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

.
I also find more joy shooting with late 1950's/early 1960's vintage mechanical film cameras, I know that's simply a personal thing.

I agree with you. I love the experience of using a precision film camera (Rolleiflex, Hasselblad, Leica IIIC, Voigtander Vito, etc.), measuring exposure, and controlling the image capture myself. I use digital when I want a quicky capture of some scene, a grab and go. Sometimes, I do not even download the digital file from the SD card. I am not making a living from photography, and my situation does not reflect on professional practice. I'm glad (and not surprised) to see the revival in film use, and everyone I encounter when I am using a film camera is very supportive and curious. They invariably are fascinated to look through the finder of my Rolleiflex or Hasselblad.

 

[AndyH]

I agree with you. I love the experience of using a precision film camera (Rolleiflex, Hasselblad, Leica IIIC, Voigtander Vito, etc.), measuring exposure, and controlling the image capture myself. I use digital when I want a quicky capture of some scene, a grab and go. Sometimes, I do not even download the digital file from the SD card. I am not making a living from photography, and my situation does not reflect on professional practice. I'm glad (and not surprised) to see the revival in film use, and everyone I encounter when I am using a film camera is very supportive and curious. They invariably are fascinated to look through the finder of my Rolleiflex or Hasselblad.

That describes my shooting exactly. I also have to shoot both "record" and "glamor" real estate shots as a part of my job, and digital does that perfectly. I use digital gear for a lot of family snaps that I want to share quickly, for sports, for night sky photos, and for wildlife. It's the best tool where high ISO, high shutter speed or exposure testing are needed. I always have my DSLR with me and use it whenever I see something worth shooting.

When I go out with the specific intent of making photos at a destination or for my own pleasure, and potentially, printing and hanging, it's almost always with film. The experience of shooting is an experience in mindfulness as much as an artistic endeavor. I shoot primarily for my own pleasure and using a Hasselblad, Rollei, Leica, or Super Ikonta is both a tactile and aesthetic pleasure.

Andy

 

[Ai Print]

?????? I am glad we are all not still using horse and cart to get around, after all steam will never replace that !, and the television will never replace the cinema !!!

Move with the times.

NO really, I am a pro photographer, UK and Welsh NUJ photojournalist, press card etc, the best thing that happened to photography was digital, though I have taken up film again re buying my old Nikon F and Nikkormats and f1.4 l3nses, great hobby, but no way would I ever go back to film,

The good old days................. never were in all manner of things.

Well that sounds like a personal choice, right? I'm sure Micheal Kenna makes a hell of a lot more than any photojournalist and he would never dream of giving up film. I have been a professional for over 31 years and would never dream of giving up film as well. But, I have also used digital far longer than most and at 25 years with it, the medium is as old hat to me as film is.

There simply is no need to say things like "Move on with the times" or the other tired arguments against using film that have died since oh, 15 years ago when it is simply a fantastic niche medium. And you don't have to "go back" to film by the way, you can push it into new territory and move forward.

 

[TMcG1959]

I think using film is quite a valid option however the thrill of processing film and printing in a wet darkroom is something I personally don't want to return to. Been there, done that for years. Time to move on.

 

[John51]

Wet printing isn't what I'd call thrilling. It's what I need to do to get a print. If people loved the tedium of it all, they wouldn't buy go faster gear. Nah, I don't want a freebie Durst Printo in good working order. I'd much rather hand develop.

 

[alentine]

Some very interesting comments, thank you everyone. Today I ordered a Canon 800D camera and sadly started packing my film equipment away. Dawning of a new era.

Congrats. That's good for you.
Photography(Film) need time and craft to master. Artists choice of a creative medium.
Digital, is faster easier and cheaper with instant gratification. Professionals choice to earn more money.
Each pathway is 180° from the other, as much as Rollei camera differs from Canon 800D.
Congrats TMcG.

 

[TMcG1959]

Update: the Canon 800D I bought turned out to be a grey import so I returned it for a full refund. I fumbled around a few weeks and then bought the same Canon 800D from Jessops for Christmas. My two Rolleis were packed into a nice box for safe keeping. Armed with my 60Plus travel pass, I can now travel free by train and take my Canon with me.

 

[David Reynolds]

My experience is this: Things never get better as time marches on. They only get worst. I find the participators in the digital world have us over a barrel. An example: I bought an Apple desktop back in the Nineties along with Photoshop . Of course Apple stopped supporting the desktop a few years later and after trying to upgrade the desktop and the resulting crash of this unit, I was forced to purchase a new one and forced to purchase new Photoshop software. Again after a few years Apple stopped supporting this second desktop and I was faced with the same circumstances. It is like a recurring nightmare. Now you can't even buy Photoshop software, you have to rent it and it is stored off site in some sort of cloud.
Thank God I did not get rid of my film equipment. I have a Leica collection (M3 M4 M5), a Rolleiflex 3.5F, Bronica ETR and Linhoff Karden 4X5. Although these cameras were manufactured as far back as the 1950's I can pickup which ever one I want to use and I don't have to pay some digital entity to upgrade it or find out it no longer works. The same goes for making prints.You can't beat a Darkroom and the silver gelatin prints that are produced.. It takes knowledge of Physics and Chemistry as well as creativity. Today one needs only to be a button pusher ( not my cup of tea) to photograph and produce images. As a result the quantity of images has greatly increased today and if you apply general economic theory to this production it has only cheapened the photograph.
That's my view
David Reynolds

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Digital has a steep learning curve, but once you've familiar with Photoshop, you can take your photography to a new level.

Keeping in mind I'm speaking from a perspective of one who is not relying on photography as way of making a living, I'd probably say .. a different level, assuming "new" implies some sort of superiority. No question detail that can be twisted beyond recognition (or whichever way to one's satisfaction) is with digital, yet I find digital too sterile in its entire process. I do it for convenience and often practicality, but reassigning some time to film has been a godsend for me.
....................
PS. Editied, as I do NOT rely on photography to make a living.
...................

 

[blockend]

Now you can't even buy Photoshop software, you have to rent it and it is stored off site in some sort of cloud.

About five laptops ago, my computer came with a full set of disks for picture and video editing to graphic design and the operating system. One of them was Photoshop, which I still use for editing film images. I read an article late last year that claimed Adobe had said using older software was a breach of contract and illegal! For digital photography I've always used the discs that came with the camera, downloads of the latest iteration, or other freeware like Rawtherapee. I've also seen great editing in Snapseed, another free software. Digital photography is a mixed blessing, on one hand it's virtually free - if you use existing cameras - but storage on and offline is subject to whatever leverage a business wishes to apply, and prone to the standardisation shifts of any infant technology.

 

[Luckless]

. I read an article late last year that claimed Adobe had said using older software was a breach of contract and illegal! .

Citation needed?

[There IS a 'freely downloadable' copy of one of the older versions of Photoshop where the validation system was disabled due to technical reasons. Nothing stops you from downloading and using it, but it is illegal to do so if you don't own a license for that version. They were no longer able to validate licenses for it, so disabled the requirement to ensure legitimate license holders were not locked out of their software, but many saw it as 'free software'...

Beyond that they also wash their hands even of even more liability if you insist on using out of date versions of CC.]

 

[David Reynolds]

Citation needed?

[There IS a 'freely downloadable' copy of one of the older versions of Photoshop where the validation system was disabled due to technical reasons. Nothing stops you from downloading and using it, ...................


Could you supply a link to this download please

 

[David Reynolds]

Could you supply a link to this download please

 

[MattKing]

Now you can't even buy Photoshop software, you have to rent it and it is stored off site in some sort of cloud.

You have never been able to buy and own the Photoshop software. At most, you were able to buy a license to use the software, subject to certain conditions. Adobe used to provide free support for that software for a limited period of time after you purchased the license.
The only change is that now Adobe won't support the software license you have unless you pay them regularly.
The support matters for a whole bunch of reasons, not least of which is that, for many people, their underlying operating system is being frequently updated, and the Adobe software needs to take into account those changes.

 

[mshchem]

I have a subscription to the Adobe CC, I use it with Vuescan for scans of my Dad's old Kodachrome slides. I store everything on my own drives and cards, stupid because if something happens it's all gone. I wish I was more proficient with software. I get by fine, but I am more comfortable in a darkroom.
Digital cameras are amazing, so are film cameras, in 100 years it will all be dust, and so shall I.

 

[Sirius Glass]

You have never been able to buy and own the Photoshop software. At most, you were able to buy a license to use the software, subject to certain conditions. Adobe used to provide free support for that software for a limited period of time after you purchased the license.
The only change is that now Adobe won't support the software license you have unless you pay them regularly.
The support matters for a whole bunch of reasons, not least of which is that, for many people, their underlying operating system is being frequently updated, and the Adobe software needs to take into account those changes.

The last time I checked one still does not need a license to use XTOL nor pyro developers. No annual fees either.

 

[mshchem]

The last time I checked one still does not need a license to use XTOL nor pyro developers. No annual fees either.

I WAS TOLD DIFFERENT

 

[Deleted member 88956]

You have never been able to buy and own the Photoshop software. At most, you were able to buy a license to use the software, subject to certain conditions. Adobe used to provide free support for that software for a limited period of time after you purchased the license.
The only change is that now Adobe won't support the software license you have unless you pay them regularly.
The support matters for a whole bunch of reasons, not least of which is that, for many people, their underlying operating system is being frequently updated, and the Adobe software needs to take into account those changes.

Isn't CC NOT stored on your computer? Which is what that pst was poking at. I am on last hard installation version of Lightroom, unlikely to upgrade, and still get annoyed by occasional denial for using it when somehow, upon opening it with no internet connection it well ... asks for verification. And yes, it is fully purchased legal copy that's been verified, and re-verified over and over with Adobe's server..

 

[removed account4]

My experience is this: Things never get better as time marches on. They only get worst. I find the participators in the digital world have us over a barrel. An example: I bought an Apple desktop back in the Nineties along with Photoshop . Of course Apple stopped supporting the desktop a few years later and after trying to upgrade the desktop and the resulting crash of this unit, I was forced to purchase a new one and forced to purchase new Photoshop software. Again after a few years Apple stopped supporting this second desktop and I was faced with the same circumstances. It is like a recurring nightmare. Now you can't even buy Photoshop software, you have to rent it and it is stored off site in some sort of cloud.
Thank God I did not get rid of my film equipment. I have a Leica collection (M3 M4 M5), a Rolleiflex 3.5F, Bronica ETR and Linhoff Karden 4X5. Although these cameras were manufactured as far back as the 1950's I can pickup which ever one I want to use and I don't have to pay some digital entity to upgrade it or find out it no longer works. The same goes for making prints.You can't beat a Darkroom and the silver gelatin prints that are produced.. It takes knowledge of Physics and Chemistry as well as creativity. Today one needs only to be a button pusher ( not my cup of tea) to photograph and produce images. As a result the quantity of images has greatly increased today and if you apply general economic theory to this production it has only cheapened the photograph.
That's my view
David Reynolds

while i can sympathize with you, did you really think that aapple was going to keep supporting a computer whose infrastructure was 20 or 30 years old ? radio shack doesn't still support the TRS80 either ...
laptops and computers that can take the most recent apple OS don't cost thousands, there is a shoppe down the road from me that is selling spiffy re-vamped upgraded laptops for between 250-500$ ... and getting a subscription to photoshopcc isn't necessary. they still sell photoshop LE why not get that ? its only like 50bucks, or get affinity also -- 50bucks.
your commentary about only needing to be a button pusher is kind of funny cause most film users have been button pushers since about 1886 ! and most people who use film have no knowledge of physics or chemistry ... creativity, who knows... nothing is really much different, other than one might desire to upgrade their
equipment from time to time and get a sensor that records more information for their facebook uploads. not much different than trading in the hawkeye brownie for
the leica m3 or a linhof to make nicer 4x6 / 4x5 prints.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

while i can sympathize with you, did you really think that aapple was going to keep supporting a computer whose infrastructure was 20 or 30 years old ? radio shack doesn't still support the TRS80 either ...
laptops and computers that can take the most recent apple OS don't cost thousands, there is a shoppe down the road from me that is selling spiffy re-vamped upgraded laptops for between 250-500$ ... and getting a subscription to photoshopcc isn't necessary. they still sell photoshop LE why not get that ? its only like 50bucks, or get affinity also -- 50bucks.
your commentary about only needing to be a button pusher is kind of funny cause most film users have been button pushers since about 1886 ! and most people who use film have no knowledge of physics or chemistry ... creativity, who knows... nothing is really much different, other than one might desire to upgrade their
equipment from time to time and get a sensor that records more information for their facebook uploads. not much different than trading in the hawkeye brownie for
the leica m3 or a linhof to make nicer 4x6 / 4x5 prints.

The button pushing to me is more about automatics in digital photography, shots taken at thousand-a-minute rate with not much thought given. Sure, not all digital shooters do that, and both, film and digital,up require skill to end with a fine image. Yet, traditional process has requirements that, if not done correctly it ends up in a bin with no way to get it back in any form, outside of trying to re-shoot, which for many subjects is no longer possible, Digital has vastly changed that and certainly diluted a need for the know how to get anything of potential value.

I would not equate upgrading cameras/lenses to what it is happening in digital world. There was a vast difference going from Brownie to a top notch mechanical marvel, than upgrading your sensor from millions of pixels to a few more million of pixels with zero added photographic value. There is a huge difference in handling experience of film camera that gives an assuring feel in handling and mechanical/optical consistency (as in switching Brownie to say ... a Nikon) than getting a bigger sensor with likely "faster" (by nano-seconds) system response times, that only gives most upgraders a sense of ... well, got more pixels, must make better photo now. The advertising pressure that always implies newer is always better for you, never had more useless value than in current world.

Digital is here, hopefully so is film. Both have pros & cons, but vastly different experiences. Completely incomparable.

 

[MattKing]

Isn't CC NOT stored on your computer? Which is what that pst was poking at. I am on last hard installation version of Lightroom, unlikely to upgrade, and still get annoyed by occasional denial for using it when somehow, upon opening it with no internet connection it well ... asks for verification. And yes, it is fully purchased legal copy that's been verified, and re-verified over and over with Adobe's server..

You didn't buy the software, you bought a license to use the software, and it came with terms.