How about this for the ultimate compromise solution (digital v. film) ?

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Steve Evans, Nov 22, 2004.

  1. Steve Evans

    Steve Evans Guest

    The best digital cameras are very expensive, still have a long way to
    improve, and, we are told, still not as good as the best film SLRs.
    For film SLRs, processing costs are expensive, when done by a lab and
    time-consuming if done at home and most of the pictures, perhaps, you
    wish you hadn't bothered taking.
    How about this compromise idea: invest in (taking one example out of
    the blue) a Nikon F4 outfit (35mm film) and a developing
    tank/chemicals and a 35mm film scanner. Shoot the film, get
    *excellent* results as you will from such a great camera, develop the
    film only in the tank ( no enlarger/developing trays and stuff needed)
    and use the scanner to generate only the pictures you want from the
    The best of both worlds until affordable 30MP digis and 10GB cards
    come along!
    Steve Evans, Nov 22, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Steve Evans

    jaedend Guest

    I use both. I have a Canon 300D and a T2. I use both equally as
    muich, but for projects that I want a really good looking print from I
    always use film. I sometimes use both for the same project too... I
    set up with the digital because I can see right then and there what
    effect unusual lighting etc. will have on my shot - then I can get a
    better idea of what adjustments I need to make for my film shot. I
    don't waste quite as much film this way.
    jaedend, Nov 22, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. It's a good solution for ultimate quality, and/or when you can't afford a
    DSLR, but you can afford a few hundred for a film scanner. The big problem
    is time. Even amateurs who only shoot a whole film every now and then will
    get fed up of the time it takes to scan, but a professional, who shoots 5-10
    rolls per job/wedding will be spending their entire life scanning
    (seriously, I did calculate it!). You simply cannot beat the convenience of
    plugging the camera in and copying a whole folder full of (almost) dustless
    jpgs instantly!
    Martin Bishop, Nov 22, 2004
  4. Steve Evans

    Matt Guest

    I remember a few years ago that there was a 35mm film which came with some
    sort of self-developing kit. I think it was made by Polaroid.

    The main advantage in using this was that you can process your own films
    immediately after shooting, and scan if you wanted to.
    Matt, Nov 22, 2004
  5. Steve Evans

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Depends on how much time and patience you have on your hands. If you want
    that one single shot of excellent quality, sure. But now imagine shooting,
    say, a wedding, and processing it this way. No thanks.
    Mike Kohary, Nov 22, 2004
  6. Steve Evans

    ericm1600 Guest

    That's my workflow. The major downside is still time. About an hour to
    develop 4 rolls of film, and then 8 minutes per picture I want to scan. I'm
    happy with my results, though.
    ericm1600, Nov 24, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.