Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

  1. #1
    Senior Member helenhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,895
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Heres an RD1 Shot VERSUS M4 Shot....
    Which Do You Prefer ?....

  2. #2
    Senior Member emmawest72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Waterloo,Belgium
    Posts
    443
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    I prefer M4 shot. First there is som eye contact ( friendly/ unfriendly?).The first shot is too impersonal for me. It feels too much as a stolen pic whereas there is interaction and a better perspective in the m4 shot.
    Second the tones are way better in second shot. The RD1 tones are too flat in my taste.

    Cheers
    William

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Knorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,999
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Helen,
    it's obvious even for a n00b like me that the m4 shot wins hands down.
    There are simply too many differences for a fair comparison.

    Kind regards.
    Bart ...

  4. #4
    Subscriber Member TRSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Central Maine, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,406
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    I agree that the second shot is better. But not strictly because it's made with film.

  5. #5
    Senior Member helenhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,895
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Well Thank You All for your feedback ... and I do agree /shot 2

    This fellow in the picture
    I found the weekend before
    and this past weekend HE was there again
    in the exact same spot.
    This time I had the M4 and he was kind enough to recognize me & allow me the shot....with a smile from the Eye
    and William, you are quite right
    I did steal that first shot...he was totally unaware

    -H

  6. #6
    Registred Users MoJo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Santa Fe
    Posts
    213
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    I like this one too.... ;-)
    My photoblog: http://josefskye.tumblr.com
    Friend me on Facebook: Josef Skye Tornick

  7. #7
    Senior Member ShiroKuro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hawaii/Japan
    Posts
    650
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    31

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Not sure what is meant by a "stolen picture" ...... the composition of the second shot is much better than first image ...... The "stop" hand in the distance ,the eyes on the bag looking back .... bags and buckets being carried by hooded & faceless people ... For me the guy on the right wether there is eye contact or not makes no difference .... perhaps I prefer there were none ..or he where looking at the bag ... there is much more to this image than the man in the foreground .... my eyes are drawn all through this photograph where as the first one ..... nothing ...

    Aloha ; )

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    First one, the subject is either not in focus or suffers from motion, is flat in contrast, and features a centered, non-dynamic subject composition. None of which has to do with being digital.

    Second one is sharper, has better tonal values, uses the Golden Mean compositionally, and tells a story of isolation by separating the subject from the bustling crowd. None of which has anything to do with being shot on film.


  9. #9
    nei1
    Guest

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    A stolen picture is one where youve paid nothing for it,the hip shot is the classic stolen shot,no emotional and little intellectual involvement with the subject or the picture taking process coupled with a desire to cut and run before being discovered,in severe cases this can be linked to complete artistic responsability for the odd lucky "good"shot.

  10. #10
    nei1
    Guest

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    As an image the first is not too bad to my eye either but the second is the better photo,not sure if the film digital thing applies until youve got the best out of both,all the best Helen,==== Neil.









  11. #11
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    This proves that film is better than digital. Or was it the other way around.
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  12. #12
    asabet
    Guest

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Second one is sharper, has better tonal values, uses the Golden Mean compositionally, and tells a story of isolation by separating the subject from the bustling crowd. None of which has anything to do with being shot on film.

    I find it easier to get better tonal values with film than with digital. With digital B&W, I often need to underexpose and then postprocess to lift the mids and shadows while increasing contrast. With film, most of the time it seems that very little postprocessing is needed for basic documentary/situational photography. B&W landscape is different, I suppose, in that postprocessing carefully is needed whether film or digital.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Quote Originally Posted by asabet View Post
    I find it easier to get better tonal values with film than with digital. With digital B&W, I often need to underexpose and then postprocess to lift the mids and shadows while increasing contrast. With film, most of the time it seems that very little postprocessing is needed for basic documentary/situational photography. B&W landscape is different, I suppose, in that postprocessing carefully is needed whether film or digital.
    Not so surprising perhaps, considering the decades spent tweaking the B&W chemistry to get the tonal response curves right.

    With digital, OTOH, you start with a capture that has been tweaked to behave more or less linearly in color. Converted to B&W, you get a monochrome image with a linear response. Not because it's digital, but because it's from a color original.
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  14. #14
    nei1
    Guest

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Good point Lars,what do you think of the "dynamic black and white"setting on the panasonic lx3.Is it recording the image as a black and white film would or is it just post processing a straight colour image.I presume its the later but is the former possible?

  15. #15
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Quote Originally Posted by nei1 View Post
    Good point Lars,what do you think of the "dynamic black and white"setting on the panasonic lx3.Is it recording the image as a black and white film would or is it just post processing a straight colour image.I presume its the later but is the former possible?
    Well, from the samples I found I would guess that a certain color filter is applied and then a transfer curve to get some toe shoulder. Which is how a neg B&W film + print workflow would behave. It doesn't have to be more complicated than that.

    What is unknown is what color filtering is applied (when calculating a lightness value from the red, green and blue samples). Perhaps that is configurable in the camera?
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    belgļe
    Posts
    1,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    even though i am looking a film myself (for various reasons), i have to defend digital, especially the Epson. it is capable of beautiful tonal values, as long you know how to expose and process properly.

    even better, it allows you to use older, less contrasty lenses, to greater heights.... as an example, the 50 Lux above can be murky and muddy with some film (i've read many comments on it as it's one i own) whereas it's easy to cut through the fog with digital by tweaking the levels and the like.

    i love film, its texture and crop factors, but i refuse to believe it makes better pictures.

    it's the person behind the camera and how they feel about it. i know Helen loves her film, and takes much more care in shooting with it. it shows! but i'd much rather see a fairer example than one above, if we are to compare.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Quote Originally Posted by cam View Post
    even though i am looking a film myself (for various reasons), i have to defend digital, especially the Epson. it is capable of beautiful tonal values, as long you know how to expose and process properly.

    even better, it allows you to use older, less contrasty lenses, to greater heights.... as an example, the 50 Lux above can be murky and muddy with some film (i've read many comments on it as it's one i own) whereas it's easy to cut through the fog with digital by tweaking the levels and the like.
    It really depends on what kind of film you refer to. Color slide film has curves that are tweaked for final presentation, i.e. it's not really suitable to make prints from (but we do it anyway). The one exception is E100G which was designed for scanning, and possibly some versions of Astia. Negative film, especially B/W, can have a huge exposure latitude due to its non-linear response, and cover in the range of 12 up to 20 f-stops. But of course it's a lot easier to tweak a digital tonal curve after the fact than using the zone system all the way through exposure and development. Come to think of it, that's probably what you meant.
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  18. #18
    cledry
    Guest

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Quote Originally Posted by nei1 View Post
    Good point Lars,what do you think of the "dynamic black and white"setting on the panasonic lx3.Is it recording the image as a black and white film would or is it just post processing a straight colour image.I presume its the later but is the former possible?
    My older L1 also has the Dynamic B&W film mode, it isn't bad but processing a colour shot always gives more options.

    The two shots presented are a very poor choice for comparison IMHO. Too different and there are digital B&W that come much closer to the M4 image than the example posted.

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    I a had a shoot at Chateau Versailles outside Paris last month where I used my Hasselblad 501, Contax 645, and Canon 5D's.
    To be honest with you the images from the film cameras just looked so much better that I lost interest in editing my digital files.









    www.josefisayo.com

  20. #20
    Senior Member helenhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,895
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    [QUOTE=Sharokin;66434]I a had a shoot at Chateau Versailles outside Paris last month where I used my Hasselblad 501, Contax 645, and Canon 5D's.
    To be honest with you the images from the film cameras just looked so much better that I lost interest in editing my digital files.


    Yea ...FILM LIVES ...How I Agree...
    and I soooo AGREE
    love to tweak abit after my negatives are scanned to disc
    and probably PREFER that than a real darkroom of dodging & burning

    and film is sooo breathtaking with its Subtleties ,Flaws & Gradations of Light & Tones


    For me I'm hooked on Film & right now the M2
    /everything manual no bells & whistles
    BUT will buy a small compact either the gx200 or DP2 for my Pocket
    and Yes I have become a Bore with no more Digital Camera purchasing

    CLEDRY: You are Correct not the Best Pixs to compare but it was the only Film versus Digital /same man same location shot I have
    and I do get carried away with the Enthusiasm of the Moment...

    Cheers ! Helen
    Last edited by helenhill; 31st December 2008 at 14:18.

  21. #21
    Super Moderator Cindy Flood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,581
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    118

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    Helen, I think it is really hard to compare these two shots. The framing, light, subject are just so much better in the film shot. One thing for sure, your enthusiasm is contagious.

  22. #22
    Johannes01
    Guest

    Re: DIGITAL Shot compared to FILM Shot

    yeah,i like the second one,too.Nice shots.This is a proof that M4 shot is far more better.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •