Digital v. Film

[Julz518]

You mentioned in another post that a lot of photographers are now using Digital instead of film b/c they can take more pictures for no additional cost.

However, it seems that some photographers still "swear by" film.
I personally prefer digital, but the debate still confounds me...

What are the advantages and disadvantages in each? Can a photographer use both for my wedding, or is it impractical? I've heard that only "really high end" digital cameras are as good as film - should I ask my photog what equipment she uses, and if so, what specs are important?

Thanks again!

[Marci Curtis]

I was a true holdout for film. I like the way it looks, I like it because it's what I'm used to. The only problem is that now most of our clients grew up with digital images and for you all, this is how photos look... this is your "normal". Good digital cameras are not at all like your digital point and shoots. The area that captures the digital information (the sensor) is four times larger and the equipement much more sophisticated. Most of our camera bodies cost anywhere from $1500-$5000. I don't want to get into models, but high end Nikons and Canons are the standard for we photojournalists. When I did make the switch to digital, I couldn't believe that I hadn't made the switch earlier. It was like putting on a blind fold whenever I had to go back to film. Now I can see my light as I go along and make the adjustments on the fly. It's made me a better, more accurate shooter. Folks that insist that film is better either haven't shot digital, or don't want to make the considerable investment to switch. It does look a bit different, but it's a completely flexible medium and anybody who switches will have an awful time understanding why they didn't make the switch earlier!

[munchkin]

I use a high end digital Nikon for my photojournalism work, and absolutely love it. I can see the photos immediately, and there's no giant wait for film to be processed. I use film very occasionally now, but it's so rare that I don't think I've even pulled out my film camera in at least two years. I highly recommend digital.

[Cirig]

Julz- my photographer used a "high end" digital camera. We got such beautiful/ crisp clean pictures. If you want to see them, pm me & I'll give you a link to them.

[feb-bride]

I was a long-time holdout against digital cameras. To me, a "film" camera takes much better pictures. Digital pictures, if you don't have a high-end camera, look "doctored" to me.

I have a digital camera now, but we spent a lot of money for a high-end camera because I didn't want "fake-looking" pictures.

[sparklesweetie]

I just recently got a point and shoot type digital, and it's decent. But I wouldn't want to use it for something as important as a wedding. I still have my APS film camera, and I love it. That thing takes the best pictures for being a regular old camera...my pictures from the reception are the only ones that turned out. Everyone else's (digital or film) came out grainy and discolored.
My wedding was shot with film, btw, and they're good pictures. But I also wasn't given the option of using digital.

[NovemberGal]

My photog was digital (I don't know what, but a fancy one, not a point and shoot) and I LOVE my pics. I posted a link a while ago, but could dig up the thread if you're interested.

[555Ann555]

Originally Posted by NovemberGal

My photog was digital (I don't know what, but a fancy one, not a point and shoot) and I LOVE my pics. I posted a link a while ago, but could dig up the thread if you're interested.

I wouldn't mind another look!

[SerendipityCrafts]

We prefer digital but, and this is a big BUT - if you do go with someone who uses digital, please make sure that they have been using digital equipment for some time and they KNOW how to use it. I would insist on seeing a portfolio of their digital work only. Our photographer didn't know his new equipment very well and as a result, we didn't get anything that we could really use.

[NovemberGal]

Originally Posted by 555Ann555

I wouldn't mind another look!

I should have known! Probably not really the right place for this, but here it is:

http://www.kodakgallery.com/ShareLan...fromshare&Ux=0

You don't need to sign in/create an account to view it.

[Julz518]

Originally Posted by SerendipityCrafts

If you do go with someone who uses digital, please make sure that they have been using digital equipment for some time and they KNOW how to use it. I would insist on seeing a portfolio of their digital work only. Our photographer didn't know his new equipment very well and as a result, we didn't get anything that we could really use.

Good Point! That sucks that you weren't able to use any of it.

I've come across some photographers who seem to stress their "photoshop" skills - like, they say "I can make the photo black and white, sepia, distressed, antique, etc.". I'm not really interested in any "special" effects, so I think I am going to stay away from those "types" of photographers and try to find someone who really knows PHOTOGRAPHY - whether film or digital.

[SerendipityCrafts]

Originally Posted by Julz518

Good Point! That sucks that you weren't able to use any of it.

My husband is a graphic designer and so his photoshop skills are above average but even still, there is only so much you can do with substandard pics. He says "Garbage in .... garbage out". Dark pics ... he could lighten. Backgrounds ... he could take out or blur. Skin blemishes - poof gone Heck, he can even put people into a photograph that weren't there to begin with ... but there isn't much that can be done with out of focus or grainy pics.

We are thinking that we might take the best of the pics to an artist to have recreated into an oil portrait.

[Heather]

Originally Posted by Julz518

I've come across some photographers who seem to stress their "photoshop" skills - like, they say "I can make the photo black and white, sepia, distressed, antique, etc.". I'm not really interested in any "special" effects, so I think I am going to stay away from those "types" of photographers and try to find someone who really knows PHOTOGRAPHY - whether film or digital.

You know Julz, that's something you could do yourself if you wanted to. If you have a photo available online, you can play around with it in Photoshop and changing things to black and white, sepia, etc. is pretty easy once you get the hang of it. I agree that you should stick to someone who really knows photography and ignore those that try to lure you with special effects - especially if they charge extra for it.

[Julz518]

Originally Posted by Heather

You know Julz, that's something you could do yourself if you wanted to. If you have a photo available online, you can play around with it in Photoshop and changing things to black and white, sepia, etc. is pretty easy once you get the hang of it.

That would be great... except the only computer I have is at work, and I don't think they will pay me to edit my wedding photos

Actually, a good friend of mine just took a "photography" class at the community college, which turned out to mainly be about photo editting. She's really gotten into it and has offered to edit our wedding photos and put together our album for us as her "gift". I'm really excited about that b/c she can then incorporate her own pics and other friend's pics with the photographer's pics...

So now I'm really just looking for a good photographer who will simply take pics and give me the copyrights to them. Who knew they were so hard to find??

[Kim&Bob2004]

I guess, because of my age maybe , I tend to still prefer to do "lasting photos" on hard film. I think, personally, that no matter what, even a 1500 + dollar camera (SLR digital camera mind you--body alone) is not gonna give you the quality that makes into good enlarged pictures.... This is speaking from a amature photographer mind you not a pro that would be able to justify the really high end cameras.... of course most people can't tell the difference. We had both at our wedding. I see positives and negatives to the digitals... biggest one being that you can see what you have taken right away and retake if needed, which is a big postive for wedding pics. Otherwise, IMHO, no digital can match quality of good film. But that is just me....

[Marci Curtis]

Hi Gang,
Following the thread, few of you seem to understand that the cameras the pro photogs use aren't like yours! Not even one little bit! Other than seeing instant feedback, that's where the similarities end. You can blow up my digital images to poster size. Once you hit life size, the grain starts to show up and I have yet to find a couple who want that size! The sensors in our cameras are the approximately an inch by 2/3 of an inch or 8 to 12 times larger than the ones on your point and shoots. If I thought for a millisecond that the quality was inferior to film, I never would've switched. Marci Curtis

[Heather]

I started reading this thread not realizing I had already posted, lol.

Feb, I'm with you in some respects in that I love the way film looks natural. One of my favorite classes in high school was photography and if I could have afforded the cameras, I may have stuck with it. I don't think I'm very good at all, but it was fun to see the results. There's just something about it.

Marci, if you ever come across a couple that wants a poster size image of a wedding photo, you must share with us.

[Liz AG]

Hi Marci,

I agree with you, having several friends that make photography their living. When you're looking at the image and it almost tricks your depth perception (or does in fact) it's truly awesome.

Liz

[munchkin]

Originally Posted by Marci Curtis

Hi Gang,
Following the thread, few of you seem to understand that the cameras the pro photogs use aren't like yours! Not even one little bit! Other than seeing instant feedback, that's where the similarities end. You can blow up my digital images to poster size. Once you hit life size, the grain starts to show up and I have yet to find a couple who want that size! The sensors in our cameras are the approximately an inch by 2/3 of an inch or 8 to 12 times larger than the ones on your point and shoots. If I thought for a millisecond that the quality was inferior to film, I never would've switched. Marci Curtis

Exactly!

[JustineMillerPhotography]

This thread is super interesting. I agree that many Photogs overprocess their images... but it is all about taste... I am Nikon DSLR girl all the way and would not ge back to film if someone paid me to. Like anything, make sure your photog matches your tastes. If you dont like all the fancy photoshop work, tell them, or find a more natural photog. NOT all digital photogs doctor their work to the point it looks unnatural. I prefer mostly natural shots.. but I always throw an artsy version in just to give them a variety to choose from.
Being a bride myself now though I am having a hard time trusting someone else to do my own photos... super afraid They wont live up to my standards..LOL.. we will see!
Oh and you most certainly can ask what equipment they are working with, however, not sure how much sense it would make if you are not used to the photography world.. just know if they show up with a sony cybershot.. you are in trouble..

[todaysdestinationwedding]

My sister was very interested in photography as a hobby. She saved up, bought a high end camera, did some photography for close friends and family and the word got out! Now she has 2 high end camera's that she takes to every job....tons of lighting equipment, a husband that assists her and a studio. We don't even think of scheduling anything during April and May due to graduations and proms.....not to mention the peak months for weddings.

She is all digital and her pictures are great....she did my wedding & my kids prom and graduation photos. I see the same quality in her pictures as found in high dollar professional studios.

I think the biggest benefit in digital photography from the consumer standpoint is the availability of a CD containing all of your pictures.(Not just how many proofs you can afford) My sister has this available to her customers in her portrait packages.

[Wonderland449]

Personally I prefer digital...I love scrapbooking and I love using regular film for it but for sharing I love digital.....take the picture, hook it up to the computer and send away!

I love the idea of being able to photoshop pictures, my FH is really good at photoshop.

However, I would rather let a trusted friend do it....it would be less insulting if they edited my looks than if my FH did! Also if I did it I feel like I would never be able to enjoy the pictures...I would just be seeing what I'd changed or what I should change, etc...

[bluocean]

I would say I prefer digital ones though, I must stress, it depends on what kind. Having a camera which is digital offers many options than a one with film. It also saves you a lot of money seeing you just need a computer to see the pictures instead of printing all the pictures from the roll of film. Though there are some digital cameras which are somethimes lousy and low-quality there are also professional digital cameras which are really really good.

[FedererPhoto]

Honestly, a good pro, in this day and age, should probably be using digital. Unless they are using medium format or some other large film size, digital is simply going to produce more and better results - given that they know their gear and have modern pro-grade stuff.

The phtographer for my wedding has an image, on canvas, in his studio that is 107 inches wide. And it was made with one-generation-back camera body technology.

IMHO, digital passed film for quality (with regard to SLR wedding photography)somewhere in the past 3 years.

As Marci says - the pro-grade gear is NOTHING like the little olympus in your purse.
But you have to ensure you are getting someone who has invested both time (learning - the most important part) and money into the best stuff. Not that the gear makes a photographer, (a bad photographer with good gear will just end up producing high-resolution junk ) but it will certainly allows a good photographer to make better images. (to a certain extent)

[HtownNole]

reported again, now go away