File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
self portrait.

Why does everyone go digital these days? I always like my film shots better...
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1544Image Height1024
>> Anonymous
>>36739

Because digital is cheap and you don't need to learn anything to use it. If a shot doesn't turn out, delete it and try again!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Because people are too lazy to learn to do things well the first time, so they need to be able to take an infinite number of pictures for nothing.

Also, marry me.
>> Anonymous
>>36745

I think OP is a guy actually, im not sure...
>> like that matters des
>>36749
4chan.
>> Anonymous
>>36749
No, I think it's a girl... I see something that is either a pair of strange clavicles or pushed-in bewbs. I think it's the latter, but I'm not sure. If it's strange clavicles, see

>>36751,
who should mightily be QFT.
>> Anonymous
>>36769
How do I become gay?
>> Jal
I think Im gonna add myself to this thread tomorrow. right now Im to tired, 2am and one bottle of wine.
>> Anonymous
It's a GUY, you dorks!
>> Anonymous
>>36798
From William S. Burrough's novel, Naked Lunch. I loaned my copy out and the PDF file wouldn't let me copy from it. Hence, screencap.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>36805
And I forgot to attach said screencap.
>> Anonymous
too bad shooting film doesn't make you a better photographer.
>> Anonymous
I've just shot through 3 rolls of Ilford B&W in the last two weeks. There's still some of us who shoot film, just not exclusively.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>36805
>> Anonymous
I never went digital. I actually *started* digital and am more recently getting into film. The reason why people go digital are pretty obvious:
1. Price
2. Speed
3. Convenience.

I shot two rolls of film tonight. The total cost for the film and the development of the film was around $15--and that's getting one of the rolls of film for free. If I hadn't been so impatient to get the film developed the same day, I could have gotten both cheaper online (there's at least one service that sends you a free roll of film every time you get a roll developed with them, for instance), but that's way, way less convenient and way, way slower.

Conversely, the other day I went out shooting primarily with my Digital Rebel. I took several hundred shots, filling up my 2gig, my 1gig, and then my 512meg cards with RAWs. The incremental cost-per-photo was $0, and they were available to see immediately. I could take a crapload of shots of each thing I found that I thought might make a good shot.

The end result? I got about three good shots from my digital set. And I got about three good shots from my film set. 3 out of Hundreds is a much lower ratio than 3 out of 48, but on the other hand, $0 for 3 out of Hundreds is a much, much better price than $15 for 3 out of 48.
>> des
>>36806
A might lot easier to just get a few pics of bridget, eh?
>> Jal
     File :-(, x)
So its morning and Im less drunk. Its not that appealing any more but I said I would so here goes ^_^

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX Optio S4iCamera SoftwareOptio S4i Ver 1.01Focal Length (35mm Equiv)41 mmMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.6Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:03:04 11:52:54RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeNight SceneContrastHardSaturationNormalSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeDistant ViewExposure Time1/4 secF-Numberf/2.8ISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length6.80 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1728Image Height2304
>> Anonymous
I use digital because I'm not as into photography as I am into photo manipulations. It's easier for me just to shoot a few things with a digital camera and work them over in photoshop than to buy a shit load of film, learn how to develop it myself or spend a lot of money getting it developed, and then have to shop it all.
>> Anonymous
>>36818

36 exposure film is win


i shoot black and white film and develop it myself, colour stuff i use digital at the moment because most of it needs to go through a computer anyway

might flick some colour film soon... we shall see
>> Anonymous
>>36846
I've never been able to find 36 exposure film anywhere in my area. So I'd have to order it online. Where it would almost certainly be cheaper than the 24-exposure stuff I buy locally, but I'm just so damn impatient.

And on the subject of impatience, 36 exposure film rolls means I'd have to take 50% more pictures before I got to see what I'd shot vs. 24 exposure film.

As for developing it myself... Yeah, way, way too much work. And I like to have a set of 4x6s so I can immediately see whether or not I got anything worthwhile without having to scan everything.
>> Ruskie
     File :-(, x)
Me too ^_^

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX K100DCamera SoftwareK100D Ver 1.00Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)75 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:02:12 22:24:20Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating3200Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3008Image Height2000RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeClose View
>> Anonymous
>>36850
36exp films are only slightly more expensive then 24exp, and developing cost is the same.
>> Anonymous
>>36853
Reread. My issue with 36 vs 24 isn't cost of film or developing, it's impatience with waiting for it to be mailed to me and impatience with having to take 36 pictures instead of 24 before I can see what's on the roll. I'm sure I could buy 36 exposure rolls cheaper than I do 24 exposure rolls, and cost of developing and getting 4x6 prints would probably be cheaper over time, it's just inconvenient.
>> Anonymous
>>36836

Wow.

Clean your mirror, plox.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Heres my own self portrait, digitally done. I shoot both b&w film, and digital lately.. All my film and development is free since I use a school camera/school film/school chemicals/school everything for it. In the last wee I've taken maybe .. (12x3)+(20x3) 96 shots with film.. gotten about 5 good shots out of it. I've shot about twice that digitally, with the same number of good results.. I personally favor film for learning how to take better pictures because it makes you think more about what your doing and how your doing it... But for going out and shooting without the major intent being to learn, I like digital, because you don't have to worry as much if you screw up, and it allows you to take pictures of one subject from different angles and different lightings without having to worry when some don't work out. Digitals also nice if you have to go in and fix the exposure, or the white balance and such, with film you already have to go, develop it, get a print, then scan it in and hope the scanning process works and your pic scans in properly before you can even try to fix it.../shrug. I don't get why people always have to choose one or the other.. both are good. (Sorry for the post/delete/post/delete thing.. getting my name out of the exif data..)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsPhotographerAnonMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2007:03:04 12:57:43Exposure Time1/125 secF-Numberf/1.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/1.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width518Image Height567RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>36739
Will OP disclose sex, just to settle it, and camera model, please?
>> Jal
>>36859Haaaaaai. I dont use it so I never notice it needs cleaning.
>> OP
>>36891
nope :o)
gender is in the eye of the beholder...

but,
I use a Minolta XD11
pic was with a 58mm MC Rokkor lens
crappy 400 fujifilm and drugstore development


I have a digicam that i like for those more record-keeping pics. those "line'em up n grin"/"I was here" shots or ebay pics. It's nice for backpacking too (film gets heavy...)

But for my "artsy" shots that I actually want to look good; I just feel like I don't have as much control with digital. anybody else feel the same?


secondly:
I used to do my own darkroom work when i had access to one at school; now i miss it. Anybody know where to find a good deal on used enlargers?
>> A trap is fine too. des
>>36912
>>enlargers
Your local craigslist or camera club. People are giving them away, figuratively and (sometimes) literally.
I haven't had access to a darkroom in a while but I make do with a shitty slide scanner. sensia ii makes a pretty good bw film.

>>gender is in the eye of the beholder...
=trap :3
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>36739

You are not alone... I shoot color slides and black and white film. have a full range of lenses and a Nikon n80 and n65.. i keep everything manual. I wouldn't photograph any of my photos any other way, unless it was for a memory thing, then I use digital. I enjoy being able to play around with light exposures and changing the way the film captures the picture; either through the iso, f-stop or cranking up the speed. Richer color and etcetc.
>> Anonymous
>>36912
>gender is in the eye of the beholder
Of course, but I asked about sex, which is what you be holdin', yo.

(In this post: ridiculously bad pun.)

What digital camera do you have?
>> Anonymous
It's a girl. Definetly not a trap. If she wouldn't disclose her womanhood she's a girl. For some reason American woman are afraid to be women. I don't understand.
>> OP
>>36922
samsung digimax s500

it's alright for just snapping off some photos; good deal for the price, and what I use it for. My only quibble is that you can't take pics in RAW (or likewise) format, and the jpeg compression sometimes seems like it's a bit lossier than it should be.


and they're called "private parts" for a reason ;p
>> eku
     File :-(, x)
I shoot film, well, did, before my new dSLR. It's nice, but it's just cost too much to scan my slides around here.

Well, here's my self potrait, taken with Canon FT QL.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelQSS-32_33Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2006:11:08 14:25:33Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width530Image Height800
>> thefamilyman !ozOtJW9BFA
     File :-(, x)
scanned on a same machine as>>36945but look how crap it is :(

Nikon F5
Fujifilm NPS 160

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelQSS-32_33Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:03:06 02:18:49Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width679Image Height1024
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Shooting film too, through my Nikon Nikkormat FTn. Too poor for digital - this camera is borrowed.

OP, Fuji's consumer film doesn't suck. If your pictures suck, blame the developer (or yourself)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>36739
meeee =D

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePix S9500Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:01:17 21:12:44Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/3.8Exposure ProgramPortrait ModeISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/3.9Brightness-1.2 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length21.60 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width600Image Height450RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypePortraitContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeClose View
>> Bridget !IRcQER6/v6
     File :-(, x)
I like film, But Digital is nice as well.. I simply can't afford a dSLR though.. So I just stick with a Film SLR

This Self-portait was taken with a Nikon D80, A little blurry because of the slower shutter speeds.
>> Cold !8r.beer.5s
     File :-(, x)
Shitty self portrait

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelDSC-V3Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2006:02:15 03:57:54Exposure Time1/1000 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width815Image Height855RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>> Anonymous
There is something strangely good about this thread. It might just be because it's sort of unique... most threads on /p/ are either "Hey what should I buy?" or "Hey look at my random photographs of [insert object, location, or rarely, person here]," whereas this one is just a little bit different. Not that there's anything wrong with either of those two thread types; it's just nice to see some variety.
>> des
>>36960
hooray nikkormat <3
My regular stompin' body was an FT2. After 30+ years the shutter winding needs replacing; she's shelved for now.
>> Anonymous
Speaking of film...

Who is a good, cheap, online/mail-off film processor? My local photoshop raeps you on BW processing
>>36818i'm looking at you
>> des
>>37030
A&I http://www.aandi.com/
I get mailers from b&h for them but you can just call them up.

If you've got access to a sink and a table, you can do bw at home and have more control over development. Those guys don't suck, I'm just saying. :)
>> dp lol des
>>37051
gah, not cheap.
Yeah, do bw at home if you need really cheap.
>> Anonymous
I don't know anything about taking pictures and I don't really get how they become art (or don't).

Anyway, does it mean digital photography is not as valuable (since you got it right on the 300th shot?) ?
>> Anonymous
Screw film, you are beautiful!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
meh, film > digital when developed and enlarged yourself, otherwise digital > film cause really if you choose film over digi and you dont develop yourself your a pretentious twat, and yah i got my enlarger free (taxed from school, think surprising adventures of sir chicken digby ceaser)
>> Anonymous
woooooooo pirates
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
me i lost the orig so i took mine off my myspace lol *Bad quality by now
>> Khomboo !yjevIi2d/Y
     File :-(, x)
>>36977
Totally agreed. I like how this thread goes. :3

Personally, I am a digital guy, because as many have said, it is alot cheaper and easier access. I dont take pictures outside of my house too often, either. I'd love to, but there's just nothing interesting around here. I have nothing against film, personally, but I just haven't gotten into it. If I ever start taking classes, which I hope to do soon, I'll probably get into film alot more. If nothing more, photography is still the best thing ever, film or not.

Oh, and for the record, self portrait lolz. My GOD my hair is fluffy in that picture. I normally actually look better than that.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKONCamera ModelCOOLPIX P3Camera SoftwareCOOLPIX P3V1.1Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.7Focal Length (35mm Equiv)36 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:02:18 21:44:55Exposure Time5/226 secF-Numberf/2.7Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating50Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, Auto, Red-Eye ReduceFocal Length7.50 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1024Image Height768RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypePortraitGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSharpnessSoftSubject Distance RangeUnknownColor ModeCOLORImage QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningLOWFocus ModeAF-CFlash SettingRED-EYEISO SelectionAUTOImage AdjustmentAUTOLens AdapterOFFAuto FocusSingle Area, TopScene ModeFACE-PRIORITYSaturationNormalNoise ReductionOFF
>> Anonymous
>>36741
>>36807

I might add to the statements about digital and film making one better or worse is that volume does not a superior photographer make.

I was taking B&W classes at college for a little while and noticed that some people did not improve when we had two "volume" assignments. (Two rolls in a week along a common theme and 6 8x10 or larger prints on fiber paper, with toning and mounted.)

Most of the people in that class shot to shoot, and thought nothing about what they were doing.

I'd submit that paying attention to things like composition and lighting versus the "spray and pray" theory of photography is a good way to go.

>>36818

I agree and disagree. I have not gone digital for a couple of reasons:
1. Obsolete equipment. I find digital irritating in that you are trapped in the same loop as most computers. In two or three years your gear is outmoded and you need new junk.

I have an EOS-3, an AE-1, and a Mamiya 645 that I shoot with and would be hard pressed to find a digital that I want. (Save the new Mamiya ZD.)

2. Craft. When I shoot, the process is something that I enjoy immensely. Setting apetures, shutter speeds, all of that goes into the enjoyment of what I do. Digital seems to me to remove a great deal of control from your hands.

3. Film performance. I know that if I shoot a roll of Fuji RHP III through my Mamiya or EOS-3 they will behave the same (relative to color values, etc.) I do not see this from digital at the moment, meaning that pictures from a Sony, a Nikon, and a Canon look different.

I don't know. Maybe I'm a luddite.
>> ac
>>37409
>I might add to the statements about digital and film making one better or worse is that volume does not a superior photographer make.
Counterpoint: Being able to shoot all day and not pay an incremental cent for it means you can practice with a lot more freedom. It won't automatically make you a better photographer, but practice always helps.

>Craft. When I shoot, the process is something that I enjoy immensely. Setting apetures, shutter speeds, all of that goes into the enjoyment of what I do. Digital seems to me to remove a great deal of control from your hands.
I take it you've never really used a digital camera? Sure, a lot of them are purely point and shoot at the low end, but if you get towards the middle-high end of the P&S cameras (and all dSLR and high-end P&S cameras), you can set your aperture and shutter speed manually. As well as ISO. And white balance. And on a lot of cameras, a bunch of other exciting features like picture styles, digital filters, etc.

>Film performance. I know that if I shoot a roll of Fuji RHP III through my Mamiya or EOS-3 they will behave the same (relative to color values, etc.) I do not see this from digital at the moment, meaning that pictures from a Sony, a Nikon, and a Canon look different.
... You... you realize that digital cameras don't use film, right? You can get used to the particular quirks of the sensor in your camera just like you get used to different types of film. Especially since you can shoot thousands shots on one sensor to get the feel of it without having to pay for new film and processing every 36th shot (or 16th shot for your 645)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
me

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 350D DIGITALLens Size18.00 - 55.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.2Owner NameunknownSerial Number0730518763Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:03:10 02:17:28Exposure Time0.4 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3456Image Height2304RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeManualFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessHighSaturationHighContrastHighShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeAI FocusDrive ModeContinuousFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalWhite BalanceTungstenExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed288Camera Actuations978059509Color Matrix0
>> des
>>37409
>>1. Obsolete equipment.

I dunno, I think we've already gone over the hump of "more than adequate" a year or three ago. Any DSLR you buy today is going to be fine until it dies. Just because a new model comes out doesn't mean the old one stops capturing images.
My DSLR is three models old at this point and the main reason I want to upgrade is to get metering with my older lenses. Which I don't "need", so I haven't.
>> jesse
>>37424
I think lenses are definitely key. Any non SLR digital has one non detatchable lens. Sometimes it's adequate, but once you get SLR it becomes aperture/shutterspeed again, which is sketchy at best on most non-SLR digital cameras.
>> Jal
Whoa, looks like I am the only one with a small/crappy cPenis here.

>>37409
I dont really agree with you on your statement about doing settings on your manual camera and not getting joy from your digital doing the same.

I might not have an manual focus on my compact digital. But I can still change focus area, white balance, iso aso. Personaly I think that digital camera gives me MOAR freedom then a manual. I can do all the settings and then take a picture and then redo it if I fail. It helps ALOT and I learn alot from it. Even when I do take digital its not allways I see whats wrong with it, but I get alot more failures with my manual than with my digital. At the end of the day I hate comming home and seing failed pictures that had great potential.
>> Anonymous
>Digital seems to me to remove a great deal of control from your hands.

With regards to the variety of film, perhaps. Rather than getting to choose from dozens of brands with different qualities, one can set the ISO, sharpness, constrast, and saturation. But otherwise, one has equal or more control.

>I'd submit that paying attention to things like composition and lighting versus the "spray and pray" theory of photography is a good way to go.

Of course. I primarily shoot with a high-end point-and-shoot (An S3IS, to be specific) and I'll spend a good amount of time setting up a shot, and then I spray. Why? First, conditions aren't constant: some little factor might change from one exposure to another that will determine whether the photograph is merely good or great. Second, it lets me correct any initial problems in my first estimation. Third, there's plenty of times when one is shooting a public that some noise or something will make you jitter a bit just at the point of exposure.

With film, one can't know if the photograph turned out well, and shooting multiple takes of something to get it just right would be very expensive: it's poke-and-pray; I want the prayer bit removed from my photography totally. I don't mind loading in film, or getting it developed, or any of that, but I do mind not being able to see my photographs after I expose them until they are developed.

Even with the higher cost, I'd probably shoot film if it were possible to see how the photograph turned out before it is developed. It's not, though, and so I shoot digital.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D40Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/5.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern834Focal Length (35mm Equiv)82 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:01:10 21:04:43Exposure Time1/8 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length55.00 mmCommentCHASE REUTERColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width782Image Height532RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationHighSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknown