Lens Diaries Go Now
Glamour, Beauty, Nude, Models, Photographers

*    |  Register  


 
Go Back   Garage Glamour™ > Garage Glamour™ Main Forums > Tech Talk Forum
 

Tech Talk Forum Photography & Technical Related Only!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Digital vs. 35mm
Old 09-01-2004, 08:46 AM   #1 (permalink)
**DONOTDELETE**
Guest
 
Member GG#:
Posts: n/a
Comments:

IP: 160.93.251.42
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Just wanted to know, am i limiting myself using strickly a digital camera rather than using both digital and a 35mm? I have an old Pentax 35mm with various lenses and filters than I've used on other photographs and I'm wondering if this would be more helpful for wide angel shots as well as closeups. What do most of you use? Currently I've been using a Sony Mavica 2.1MP, but it isn't very good. I've just purchased a Sony Cybershot DSC707 5.1MP that I'm hoping will work better, especially on vertical shots.

And last, if using a 35mm, what's the best way to get this photos onto the computer? Scanning, having the developers save it to disc?

Sorry about all the questions.
 
 
Re: Digital vs. 35mm
Old 09-01-2004, 09:59 AM   #2 (permalink)
Lifetime Photographer
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Member GG#: 35195
Posts: 440
Comments: 0

rjwarren is offline IP: 24.160.124.193
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Chuck

We welcome questions! Thanks for participating.

Your Sony 707 is going to be much better than your Mavica. However, you'll find that the 707 has limits when you try and use studio strobes. I think it has challenges triggering the units.

As far as 35mm -- most of the DSLR's are re-built 35mm cameras. You should take a look at the Canon Digital Rebel or the Nikon D70 -- full-function DSLRs under $1,000.

If you do use 35mm -- it's by far the best to have the negative scanned. If you're going to do this on a regular basis or if you have lots of old negs you want to scan, you might invest in a 35mm film scanner. You can get good results with some of the new Polariod, Kodak and Minolta 35mm-only scanners that are under $300. If you just shoot an occasional roll -- having the processor provide a CD at the same time is usually pretty cost effective. Make sure you understand the image size you're getting on the CD. Depending on the process, some processors turn out CD's with multiple files or with small sizes only -- unless you ask.

Keep shooting!
Bob

  View Public Profile Send a private message to rjwarren Visit rjwarren's homepage! Find More Posts by rjwarren
 
So many questions...so many answers
Old 09-01-2004, 10:41 AM   #3 (permalink)
Free Member

 
eselby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Member GG#: 35236
Location: Ball Ground
Posts: 360
Comments: 0
Send a message via AIM to eselby Send a message via Yahoo to eselby

eselby is offline IP: 63.84.113.195
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

As a recent convert to the Digital Church, lemme tell ya - the conversion ain't easy, but the benefits are many.

Benefits - "free" shooting! This has been the bane/boon of going digital. I can shoot as much as I want. That means that after a digital shoot, instead of 100 or so images of film, I have 300 or so. Which means more post-production; i.e., resizing, touching up, sharpening, archiving, converting, burning, calibrating, previewing, printing, etc., etc.

With film, you can drop off at your trusted lab, have them process and scan your images, and get decent to great 4x6 prints. Of course, that costs money. When you shoot for a hobby, and every penny of your costs comes out of your own pocket, shooting is limited. Besides, who needs prints of *everything*?

I have not made the "switch" to digital. It is merely one more format of shooting. I do shoot most of my stuff digital now, but that's like saying I shoot mostly 35 or mostly medium format. The fact is, there are things that digital is more suited for and things it is less suited for.

Another f'rinstance -- I am doing a Naiads shoot this weekend, probably the last of the season, and I will be shooting it with film. Why? The shoot is black and white. My computer is painfully under-resourced to do the detailed conversions from color to b+w, and I am not nerely proficient enough with my digital camera and post-shoot processing to "fake" the skin tones and grain and contrast I get shooting Ilford HP5 with a yellow filter hand processed and printed to 11x14 on Ilford Multigrade IV Fiber Paper.

The skill you learn shooting film will carry over quite well into digital. But with digital comes a whole new set of skills to learn. The conversion isn't overnight. Sure, I can shoot more and not worry about film costs, but the *time* I put into creating a final image has quadrupled. That will change as my skills, and my hardware, are upgraded. It is a learning curve I look forward to. But don't expect miracles from your digital camera.

A camera is a hammer. It is just a tool used to achieve a desired result.
  View Public Profile Send a private message to eselby Visit eselby's homepage! Find More Posts by eselby
 
Re: Digital vs. 35mm
Old 09-01-2004, 05:42 PM   #4 (permalink)
LivingINDaytona

 
JaysonFromMaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Member GG#: 35280
Location: Daytona Beach. Fl.
Posts: 741
Comments: 0
Send a message via AIM to JaysonFromMaine Send a message via Yahoo to JaysonFromMaine

JaysonFromMaine is offline IP: 24.128.126.246
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

now that is an educated photo!
  View Public Profile Send a private message to JaysonFromMaine Visit JaysonFromMaine's homepage! Find More Posts by JaysonFromMaine
 
Re: Digital vs. 35mm
Old 09-01-2004, 09:47 PM   #5 (permalink)
Free Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Member GG#: 36812
Location: Saginaw
Posts: 320
Comments: 0

j4m3z is offline IP: 68.55.79.191
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

I still use 35mm and honestly I'm looking to move into digital soon especially for glamour work. The primary reason is recurring cost. If I shoot conservatively I'll have three rolls of a model. The total cost of film and processing works out to about $40. I use Fuji Provia 100F slide film which you can get for around $4/roll. It's a bit less expensive to get developed $9/roll as apposed to $12 for print film. I mainly use a Canon A-1 or an EOS 620. The manual focus Canon's are probably the best deal on the market right now, unfortunately there's no way to use their excellent lenses on any current digital bodies. I use a minolta scanner to scan the slides, I got it used for a hellva deal. Another nice thing about 35mm, no chimping [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] but the other side of that coin is that you don't know what's on the film until it comes back from the lab.

One of the things that concerns me about going digital is the life expectancy of the images, having to transferring them from media to media, equipment failure. format obsolencence, etc. I think that even when I move to digital, I still take some chromes.
  View Public Profile Send a private message to j4m3z Visit j4m3z's homepage! Find More Posts by j4m3z
 
Re: Digital vs. 35mm
Old 09-01-2004, 10:17 PM   #6 (permalink)
Free Member

 
isaiahbrink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Member GG#: 39216
Location: Salisbury
Posts: 1,180
Comments: 2
Send a message via MSN to isaiahbrink Send a message via Yahoo to isaiahbrink

isaiahbrink is offline IP: 69.105.67.125
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

For the longest time, I would not have even considered digital a viable photographic medium until the quality went up. Well, it is there, now. I have no problems with going digital now with the exception of the cost of a good digital SLR. But the pros are that there is no cost for film or processing. So, you save money in the long run. The one other problem that I have with digital is that the technology regarding the quality (megapixels and ccd's) is improving so rapidly that I feel like, ok, I go out, spend the money for a good digital camera, and in a relatively short period of time (compared to film) my camera is so outdated that I won't be able to compete in the market any more. If anybody has any recommendations, let me know, maybe you could not only help Chuck, but myslef as well.

Isaiah Brink
  View Public Profile Send a private message to isaiahbrink Find More Posts by isaiahbrink
 
Re: Digital vs. 35mm
Old 09-01-2004, 10:58 PM   #7 (permalink)
LivingINDaytona

 
JaysonFromMaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Member GG#: 35280
Location: Daytona Beach. Fl.
Posts: 741
Comments: 0
Send a message via AIM to JaysonFromMaine Send a message via Yahoo to JaysonFromMaine

JaysonFromMaine is offline IP: 165.121.136.176
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

i saw a side by side image test ( same image taken with both the back and the 1Ds ) of the 1Ds and the new leaf 22mp... that new 22mp back makes the 1ds look like a holga...i started drooling...only a 16K price tag....

and it was shot through a window...

its eather in the new PDN, Picture, or digital photo pro ......
  View Public Profile Send a private message to JaysonFromMaine Visit JaysonFromMaine's homepage! Find More Posts by JaysonFromMaine
 
Re: Digital vs. 35mm
Old 09-02-2004, 08:13 AM   #8 (permalink)
King of Useless Facts
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Member GG#: 35691
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 499
Comments: 0
Send a message via AIM to StMarc

StMarc is offline IP: 169.207.244.175
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

"American Photo" magazine turned loose a very famous street photographer with one of those new 22MP backs in NYC, and it was darn impressive. You could read the menu on the McDonalds' sign through a window from many yards away. It's in the latest issue, the one with Janet Jackson on the cover.

M
  View Public Profile Send a private message to StMarc Visit StMarc's homepage! Find More Posts by StMarc
 
Re: Digital vs. 35mm
Old 09-02-2004, 08:53 AM   #9 (permalink)
LivingINDaytona

 
JaysonFromMaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Member GG#: 35280
Location: Daytona Beach. Fl.
Posts: 741
Comments: 0
Send a message via AIM to JaysonFromMaine Send a message via Yahoo to JaysonFromMaine

JaysonFromMaine is offline IP: 24.128.126.246
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

yeah thats the one....it seems like i just got a bunch of mags all at once i forgot .....
  View Public Profile Send a private message to JaysonFromMaine Visit JaysonFromMaine's homepage! Find More Posts by JaysonFromMaine
 
Re: Digital vs. 35mm
Old 09-02-2004, 09:26 AM   #10 (permalink)
King of Useless Facts
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Member GG#: 35691
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 499
Comments: 0
Send a message via AIM to StMarc

StMarc is offline IP: 169.207.244.175
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

No huhu, I bet you read a *lot* of them in your line of work. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I was getting PPI for a while, but I got tired of "Ten Tips For Better $somethingorother" articles, so I switched to American Photo. When I get tired of that, I'll read something else. I like AP because they do tend to specialize more in highlighting photos as opposed to mostly tech articles. I'm good on tech. I need to take better pictures.

M
  View Public Profile Send a private message to StMarc Visit StMarc's homepage! Find More Posts by StMarc
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Film Vs Digital mray Tech Talk Forum 41 11-02-2011 11:28 AM
Canon EOS 30D Digital SLR Camera & Canon....$550USD upsales Model Topics 1 07-07-2010 11:02 PM
Funny with politics and this is intended no jabs wsheldon50131 Main Community Forum 0 11-09-2006 11:14 PM
35mm slides from digital? dynamike Tech Talk Forum 2 03-08-2005 01:13 PM

Sponsors


New To Site? Need Help? Photographer & Model Links
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:55 PM.

© 1999-2017 Garage Glamour™




Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93