Because and I quote the great Ron Swanson "clear alcohols are for rich women on diets"
Because and I quote the great Ron Swanson "clear alcohols are for rich women on diets"Why drink single malt whiskey when you can drink vodka?
I cannot imagine asking the question whether someone used manual exposure/focus in creating an image. It is irrelevant.Go all manual and make your own reasoned choices to stand out from the crowd.
You can do that just as easily with digital. In fact, to be successful, it is essential to both.By shooting film thinking about my composition, and exposure settings I feel that it makes me a better photographer.
for some reason this popped up in my alerts this morning.
I cannot imagine asking the question whether someone used manual exposure/focus in creating an image. It is irrelevant.
You can do that just as easily with digital. In fact, to be successful, it is essential to both.
A perfectly good reason. It's always worth reminding ourselves photography is about making pictures, and the medium and format used are a distant second place to whether the shot is any good, or not. I prefer film, but I also shoot digital and if the supply of film dried up tomorrow I'd mourn its passing but wouldn't lose any sleep. The important thing is having a way of printing photographs, whatever they are shot on.I shoot digital mainly out of financial constraints
Still not sure why it is important whether someone shot manual exposure/manual focus or auto exposure/auto focus. The resulting image is what is important.Not exactly. They are both relevant. Just depends on what you are shooting, esp for dark, street / doc work.
I would blame the alcohol if I were you - it was clearly on your mindfor some reason this popped up in my alerts this morning.
It might be on my mind, but I have had to cut back on drinking as I am a kidney stone patient, and getting dehydrated is very bad for me.I would blame the alcohol if I were you - it was clearly on your mind
Please note that the actual light generated image on a solid state sensor is really ANALOG - it must go through an A to D converter as part of the developing process to become a digital image.
See, things aren’t really all that different.
...The analog sensors as they exist in digital cameras neither see nor capture "images" ...
Grains in film don't capture images either.
And, now that the difference between the two technologies has be described, what do we conclude?Individual grains in film don't capture images either. However, the critical difference is that an image in the emulsion is a permanent physical artifact of the actual light from the scene. Whereas a digital image in the sensor or wherever else it is stored is a transitory encoding that requires software and related hardware (a screen) in order to view it. It is an intangible creation.
And, now that the difference between the two technologies has be described, what do we conclude?
One of the reasons why I favor slide film, which can be directly viewed and is therefore a more direct connection to the original scene.For me, the image in the emulsion (on a glass plate, on film, in a Polaroid print) is a truly unique object - it is the one and only image directly formed from the original scene. For example, the Hasselblad negative showing "Earthrise" has the provenance of actually being in Moon orbit; the image can only be formed by having been there. On a less grand scale, when I look at my negatives, I have a sense of connection to the original scene.
For me, the image in the emulsion (on a glass plate, on film, in a Polaroid print) is a truly unique object - it is the one and only image directly formed from the original scene. For example, the Hasselblad negative showing "Earthrise" has the provenance of actually being in Moon orbit; the image can only be formed by having been there. On a less grand scale, when I look at my negatives, I have a sense of connection to the original scene.
hi theo
i see what you are saying and wonder about
the file of a digital exposure, doesn't it represent
being physically at the scene as well, except it isn't
a physical ( tangible ) artifact unless other steps are taken
much like undeveloped film has a latent image on it until it is processed into a negative
and what if it is a photograph of a photograph? the copy image on film is not a link to the situation ..
Don't worry - those 'digital-vs-analogue' threads are immortal and very popular here ...
Terms and Rules of this forum:
-) no digital vs. traditional threads
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?