>> |
elf_man
!!DdAnyoDMfCe
>>111779 All over the internet. Here, things have mostly settled into the patten you describe, yeah.
OP, digital's a great way to learn due to the quick feedback, if you have the discipline to not spray and pray. It necessitates a more technical mindset, though, since you're dealing with in-camera and post processing software. Digital's great if you're a computer geek; if you aren't, or don't want to spend your time learning photoshop techniques, go for film. It's still plenty technical, but you can get it processed for you and not worry about that side of it. With digital, postprocessing is pretty much expected, so you may not be satisfied with your images until you get some skill there. And personally, if I have to make more than real minor changes, I have trouble settling on something; I end up endlessly tweaking my photos. As for image quality, digital is definitely not better than film, and in some areas it can be argued that film is better. Velvia is sort of legendary, people keep trying to replicate it's characteristics in digital and failing. So go with what you like, but since you seem to be leaning towards film, I'd say just go with it. And invest in a decent scanner, it'll save you money in the long run.
|