Go Back   PhotographyCorner.com Forums > General Photography > Photography 101

Welcome to the PhotographyCorner.com Forums.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, photographs and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), vote on contests like the Photograph of the Month and Contest Corner Challenges, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support.

Archive Suite top banner


Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1    Top
Old February 14th, 2006, 09:47 PM
BioHazard3200 BioHazard3200 is offline
Junior Member
advantages with digitale

what are the advantages of digitale over film and vise versa
  #2    Top
Old February 15th, 2006, 06:49 PM
sobolik sobolik is offline
Senior Member
Here are some random notes/thoughts I had hanging around on my computer from times past.

Film Vs. Digital

Why it Matters
1) The mistaken belief that they are "upgrading" to a higher quality digital image and other benefits.
2) Many people are spending a great deal of money, in the hope of "saving" money over film costs.
3) Digital requires skill sets that aren't part of traditional photography. We all only have so much time for doing photography. Will it be spent in front of a computer, or behind a camera and lens?

How Many Mega pixels To Equal 35mm Film?
"As we've reported in the past and have deduced from our own tests, a tripod mounted, high end SLR with a superb lens and ISO 100 color print film can capture the equivalent of a 40 mega pixel sensor. Kodak's Estimate (for mid-speed ISO 100 film) is at least 24 Mega pixels equivalent... 35mm fast film (ISO 400 and up) = 22.11 mega pixel equiv. 35mm medium speed film (ISO 100 to 200) = 54 mega pixel equiv. 35mm slow speed film (circa ISO 25-80) = 124.76 mega pixel equiv. (2004 is up to about 8 mega pixels )

Prints from Film Vs. Digital Statistics -
Digital will capture 78 billion images in 2002, but only 1/3 will be printed
Film will capture and print 100 billion images in 2002 (stable for some years)
Source: Image Bible, IDC Corp, per BJP PROFESSIONAL NEWS 11/19/02

Consumer Family Photo Albums at Risk From Computer Crashes
A large fraction of consumer family digital photo albums are at risk, according to a U.K. Fujifilm funded study reported in British Journal of Photography of May21, 2003 (p.9). Some 63% of the 5 million digital camera users in the U.K. are at risk of losing some or all of their images. Some 81% of those who regularly saved images on a computer hard drive had NO form of backups! Over a third of U.K. digital camera using consumers relied solely on the computer hard drive to save their images. Yikes! How many digital camera users in the USA are also just one computer virus or hard disk crash away from losing ALL of their digital images? You can use gigabytes of local storage instead. But you have to have a way to backup those gigabytes and do so often enough not to lose data in system or virus related crashes. Digital files are subject to the various risks of film and prints (fires, floods..) but also add their own risks. Having seen lots of virus related crashes this last year alone, I suspect that digital photo files are much more at risk than traditional film and print media, especially in the home environment.

Why it Matters
Why should we care if people are misled into believing that today's prosumer digital cameras (3 mega pixels) provide better quality than film?
The short answer is that:
Many 35mm shooters are "upgrading" to digital cameras in the mistaken belief that they are getting a higher quality digital image and other benefits. As one consequence, sales of medium format cameras have dropped by circa 10% in an already small niche market. The second consequence is economic. Many people are spending a great deal of money on digital cameras, computers, software, and printers in the hope of "saving" money over film based cameras. Unless you are doing a huge volume of photographs, you probably won't recover the depreciation losses from going digital over the lower cost of film at typical amateur shooting volumes. The final reason is skills related. Being a good digital photographer involves an entire skill set of mainly computer and software related skills that aren't part of traditional photography. These skill sets have a difficult learning curve, and assume much mastery of underlying computer skills also unrelated to traditional photography. Yet we all only have so much time for doing photography. Will it be spent in front of a computer, constantly learning new software and hardware issues, or will it be spent behind a camera and lens? Will your photography get better from studying computer manuals, or from studying the images of great photographers and other artistic sources?
  #3    Top
Old February 15th, 2006, 08:13 PM
GREAPER's Avatar
GREAPER GREAPER is offline
Photo Traveler
Contributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonSilver Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 2,000 posts. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonBronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reason
As you can see by the above post you are going to get people on both sides of this issue. Many of them will post "facts not in evidence" just like
Quote:
How Many Mega pixels To Equal 35mm Film?
"As we've reported in the past and have deduced from our own tests, a tripod mounted, high end SLR with a superb lens and ISO 100 color print film can capture the equivalent of a 40 mega pixel sensor. Kodak's Estimate (for mid-speed ISO 100 film) is at least 24 Mega pixels equivalent... 35mm fast film (ISO 400 and up) = 22.11 mega pixel equiv. 35mm medium speed film (ISO 100 to 200) = 54 mega pixel equiv. 35mm slow speed film (circa ISO 25-80) = 124.76 mega pixel equiv. (2004 is up to about 8 mega pixels )

This has been discussed to DEATH, how about doing a seach for similar topics.

Do a little research and make up your own mind.
__________________
Remember, This is just the opinion of a stranger on the internet.

Check out my Galleries at:

http://dehmphoto.smugmug.com
Sponsors
  #4    Top
Old February 15th, 2006, 09:19 PM
sobolik sobolik is offline
Senior Member
Greaper - how many test have you done? Have you the "stuff" to tell Kodak the way it is? Or do you just reject data that you don't like and try to sound intelligent by saying "Many of them will post "facts not in evidence" What ever that is supposed to mean. And then attempt faulty re-application of the Kodak data as the substantiation for your opinion.
One of my main complaints with digital is that so many digital lovers try to sound so intelligent as they reject intelligence, intelligence like that gained from tests done by Kodak. Hence we get phrases like “Never let the facts get in the way of a good opinion” I have 4 digital cameras but I don’t fondle them and lose all objectivity.
  #5    Top
Old February 15th, 2006, 10:21 PM
GREAPER's Avatar
GREAPER GREAPER is offline
Photo Traveler
Contributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonSilver Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 2,000 posts. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonBronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reason
Quote:
Originally Posted by sobolik
Greaper - how many test have you done? Have you the "stuff" to tell Kodak the way it is?
What tests have I done?

None.

What tests have you done and what qualifications do you have to do a test?

Why would I tell kodak how it is? Are these figures you have posted a quote from kodak? Do you have a link to the original data? Is it recent?

Quote:
Or do you just reject data that you don't like and try to sound intelligent by saying "Many of them will post "facts not in evidence" What ever that is supposed to mean. And then attempt faulty re-application of the Kodak data as the substantiation for your opinion.
I'm not trying to sound intelligent. "Fact not in evidence" means that you are stating things as if they are a fact without evidence to back the statement up. I am definatly not re-applying the data to substantiate my opinion. I dont know where the numbers you posted come from nor do I think the numbers are acurate.

HERE is some test data that does not agree with your numbers.

HERE is a popular photagraphy article that disagrees with your theory as well.


Quote:
One of my main complaints with digital is that so many digital lovers try to sound so intelligent as they reject intelligence, intelligence like that gained from tests done by Kodak. Hence we get phrases like “Never let the facts get in the way of a good opinion” I have 4 digital cameras but I don’t fondle them and lose all objectivity.
What a load of drivel. You talk of objectivity but you did not post anything objective. You posted your one sided view without even attempting to point out the advantages of digital. The best stats you can come up with are from 2002.

I shoot digital because it works for me. I have no need to "fondle" it. I have no problem with film and think that you should use film if that is what works for you.

I am not the one trying to convince the original poster to follow my path. You are.

Image quality is what counts and that starts with the photographer. The camera is just a tool.
__________________
Remember, This is just the opinion of a stranger on the internet.

Check out my Galleries at:

http://dehmphoto.smugmug.com
  #6    Top
Old February 15th, 2006, 11:20 PM
Commando303 Commando303 is offline
Junior VIP Member
OK, I suppose that film has its advantages, while digital has its, but, as far as "technical" advantages are concerned, digital really does seem to be pulling ahead. That said, of what type of 'film" are you inquiring: 35mm, medium-format, large-format? If it's large format, there is, to my knowledge, currently (Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 11:10 P.M.) NO "digital equivalent." In the medium-format spectrum, you can get some decent digital models, but they will cost you much more than (I think) you'd like to pay (I assert this based, largely, on the fact that you asked this question, which shows that you are likely not a professional, who'll "make the money back over a couple of shoots"). With the 35mm format, however, digital has many distinct advantages. With non D-SLR type digital cameras, you have the very useful "image preview," via an LCD (which is now commonly 2.5" [large enough to see with ease]). You have the options of adjusting white balance and ISO with the push of a few buttons, rather than by having to actually change your film. You can simply discard photographs you don't like, prior to paying to print them (or to have them developed). You can store many more pictures (with high quality) on a large memory card, than you can on a 36-exposure roll of 35mm film (and, the card will eventually [yet soon] end up costing you less than the film you'll end up buying). How large are the prints you want to make? If you're going for 4X6, you don't really need anything with more than 3 megapixels (even 2 should suffice). If you blow up a shot taken with ISO 100/21 deg. film, to anything past 8X10, you'll likely notice some grain (if you look reasonably close); with a 3-megapixel (which is actually really hard to even find these days [4 megapixels will probably be the fewest you'll see (that are "new")]) camera, you'll see something comparable. Keep in mind that a little "grain" is not a horrible thing. People have been taking pictures for decades, and grain is not a new thing. It's tempting to look at reviews, and eschew any camera that doesn't exhibit "very little noise at ISO 400," but that's not a terribly bright way to go about it. At this point, Megapixels should not be your main concern. (I don't know how the hell Sobolik came up with figures such as 54- and 124.76-Megapixel models, but they are, indeed, quite absurd: such numbers go FAR above anything one should hope to expect from a 35mm roll of film.) Also, don't be turned off by CMOS: those ****ty "cheap" CMOS sensors aren't really used anymore, to-day; in fact, ironically, CMOS is found on HIGHER-END digital cameras. Umm...I have to go (I'm tired). Good luck to you.
  #7    Top
Old February 15th, 2006, 11:54 PM
Kara's Avatar
Kara Kara is offline
Premiere Member
Gold Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 5,000 posts. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContest Corner Challenge Winner: This award is given to the photographer who wins a Contest Corner Challenge. - Issue reasonSilver Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 2,000 posts. - Issue reasonBronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reason
Oi, not to sound rude or anything like that, but its a bit like asking what are the advantages of drinking coca cola over pepsi. Everyone has their preferences, however both have their place.

Personally I shoot both. If you google youll find many a discussion on this topic, there are probably a few discussions on this site. The only real answer is to try them both out and come to your own conclusion.
  #8    Top
Old February 16th, 2006, 12:00 AM
DDAY's Avatar
DDAY DDAY is offline
Premiere Member
Recent Photo: Vernal Equinox
Contributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonPhotograph of the Year Finalist: This award is given to a photographer who was a finalist in the Photograph of the Year Contest. - Issue reasonContest Corner Challenge Winner: This award is given to the photographer who wins a Contest Corner Challenge. - Issue reasonSilver Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 2,000 posts. - Issue reason
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kara
Oi, not to sound rude or anything like that, but its a bit like asking what are the advantages of drinking coca cola over pepsi. Everyone has their preferences, however both have their place.

Personally I shoot both. If you google youll find many a discussion on this topic, there are probably a few discussions on this site. The only real answer is to try them both out and come to your own conclusion.
Good analogy Kara. I'm a Coke drinker so does that make me Film or Digital user? I use both too so I guess its hard to say.

Your also right this topic has been debated to death. When will the cola drinkers just learn to get along????
__________________
-Dan

Moderator Emeritus

Great photographs are never taken they are created.
  #9    Top
Old February 16th, 2006, 12:04 AM
Kara's Avatar
Kara Kara is offline
Premiere Member
Gold Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 5,000 posts. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContest Corner Challenge Winner: This award is given to the photographer who wins a Contest Corner Challenge. - Issue reasonSilver Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 2,000 posts. - Issue reasonBronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reason
Yes and where do me and my off brand soda stand?

Just kidding Im a coke fan

But it is kind of like nikon vs canon. Which is better? There are also fuji, minolta, pentax etc.... and also RC Cola, diet rite, jolt.... I wonder what sprite would be in a camera analogy
  #10    Top
Old February 16th, 2006, 01:00 AM
Commando303 Commando303 is offline
Junior VIP Member
I like water.
Reply
Go Back   PhotographyCorner.com Forums > General Photography > Photography 101




Bookmarks

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Olympus E-520 - little advantages over E-500 gubak SLRs (Film & Digital) 1 May 14th, 2008 12:14 PM
advantages strike3 Photography 101 4 April 25th, 2006 03:31 PM
Advantages of 14MP Patman10 Places 4 July 5th, 2005 06:26 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.