Film vs. Digital
In a flash of "Luddism" (or Luddite-ism), I have refused to jump on the digital camera bandwagon. I was never a great photographer, but I managed to squeak out some fairly decent shots with my trusty Nikon, which is approaching twenty years old. I recently had to buy a new camera, as the old Nikon body, which has been through Hell and back, finally broke down and I could no longer close the film compartment without duct tape. It still works but it needs service and I can keep it around as a secondary camera when needed. I still have the original lenses, a wide angle and a telephoto, and they are still clean and SORT of maintained. Not as well as I should have maintained them, but they still take a great pic.
I did try to jump on the digital camera train fairly early when I was cataloging jewelry in 1998, and studied a little under a photographer at an automotive parts manufacturer (I was in the Production department for packaging). He had a Nikon with a digital adapter, which was quite a chunk of change back in 99. Since then I have tried different point and click digital cameras, as well as a few digital SLR's. I still haven't liked them. The closest was a Canon Rebel I played with around Easter last year, as it came closest to my Nikon 6006 experience.
The trouble, of course, is the film. Film is expensive for someone like me, who has no money but a lot of passion. And I take a lot. I bracket photos. I waste frames for exposure. And this is where I SHOULD have a good Digital SLR, because the Digital waste is subsidized into the cost of the camera. I should note that I also love the fumes of a darkroom and the chemicals, though they do not love me, especially in light of recent pulmonary problems. But fixer - it turns me on.
My digital shots are worthless. For some reason, I have a block that doesn't allow me to compose, expose, or shoot how I want. I don't know why. Perhaps it's the viewfinder, perhaps it's the LCD screen on the back of them. Perhaps it is the chintzy electronic zoom, the auto focus (though I do use autofocus on the 6006), or the lightweight nature of the point and clicks, but I find that I can't take a digital photo to save my life.
Will a DSLR change things for me? I know I would go through at least 10000 bad digital pics before getting used to it, and the plus side of that would be the digital pics could easily be trashed. Of course, it may just be too much camera for me to handle to begin with, and perhaps I should just stay the course with my 35mm and buy film in bulk. I can't set up a darkroom because of the chemicals (I'm so sorry, fixer), and developing the film gets expensive, of course. I have a bag full of undeveloped film. Almost 50 rolls of film.
The other thing is just an aesthetic of grain of the film vs. the digital image. Sure there are many applications for whatever operating system to manipulate the image, and I am sure a talented artist can fool even the most discerning eye.
While my camera usage is limited to 135mm in the 80's, the Kodak disc camera (remember those), 35mm of various stripes and lightweight point-and-click digital cameras, I still prefer the Nikon 6006. It's sturdy, it takes a good picture, and above all I am used to it's controls and quirks. The new body for it only cost me $20 on Ebay, and the lenses are still supported, so long as they are nikkor. However, I think I need to take a step in one direction or the other.
I do not think that step will be DSLR in the near future. I would rather experiment with a medium format film camera, like a Hasselblad or Yoshica, though the Hasselblads are WAY out of my price range. Yes, they expense is still there, but I am more concerned with image quality and being able to take some breathtaking photos, and I do not think that digital is the right way to go artistically. While yes there are amazing photos taken daily with digital cameras, I know that for me I need something else.
So, I think, for the time being, I will keep on keeping on with my Nikon 6006 for my photography. It's more time consuming, but that psychological block I have with digital is not going to help my skill improve. In fact, I will try one of those 365 projects next year, yet all with film. There will be a delay, of course, between the actual shots and the scanning/posting process. (Yes, scanning). I believe I have rambled on enough.
Of course, if someone wants to gift me a D90 for "review", I wouldn't turn it down! ;-)
I did try to jump on the digital camera train fairly early when I was cataloging jewelry in 1998, and studied a little under a photographer at an automotive parts manufacturer (I was in the Production department for packaging). He had a Nikon with a digital adapter, which was quite a chunk of change back in 99. Since then I have tried different point and click digital cameras, as well as a few digital SLR's. I still haven't liked them. The closest was a Canon Rebel I played with around Easter last year, as it came closest to my Nikon 6006 experience.
The trouble, of course, is the film. Film is expensive for someone like me, who has no money but a lot of passion. And I take a lot. I bracket photos. I waste frames for exposure. And this is where I SHOULD have a good Digital SLR, because the Digital waste is subsidized into the cost of the camera. I should note that I also love the fumes of a darkroom and the chemicals, though they do not love me, especially in light of recent pulmonary problems. But fixer - it turns me on.
My digital shots are worthless. For some reason, I have a block that doesn't allow me to compose, expose, or shoot how I want. I don't know why. Perhaps it's the viewfinder, perhaps it's the LCD screen on the back of them. Perhaps it is the chintzy electronic zoom, the auto focus (though I do use autofocus on the 6006), or the lightweight nature of the point and clicks, but I find that I can't take a digital photo to save my life.
Will a DSLR change things for me? I know I would go through at least 10000 bad digital pics before getting used to it, and the plus side of that would be the digital pics could easily be trashed. Of course, it may just be too much camera for me to handle to begin with, and perhaps I should just stay the course with my 35mm and buy film in bulk. I can't set up a darkroom because of the chemicals (I'm so sorry, fixer), and developing the film gets expensive, of course. I have a bag full of undeveloped film. Almost 50 rolls of film.
The other thing is just an aesthetic of grain of the film vs. the digital image. Sure there are many applications for whatever operating system to manipulate the image, and I am sure a talented artist can fool even the most discerning eye.
While my camera usage is limited to 135mm in the 80's, the Kodak disc camera (remember those), 35mm of various stripes and lightweight point-and-click digital cameras, I still prefer the Nikon 6006. It's sturdy, it takes a good picture, and above all I am used to it's controls and quirks. The new body for it only cost me $20 on Ebay, and the lenses are still supported, so long as they are nikkor. However, I think I need to take a step in one direction or the other.
I do not think that step will be DSLR in the near future. I would rather experiment with a medium format film camera, like a Hasselblad or Yoshica, though the Hasselblads are WAY out of my price range. Yes, they expense is still there, but I am more concerned with image quality and being able to take some breathtaking photos, and I do not think that digital is the right way to go artistically. While yes there are amazing photos taken daily with digital cameras, I know that for me I need something else.
So, I think, for the time being, I will keep on keeping on with my Nikon 6006 for my photography. It's more time consuming, but that psychological block I have with digital is not going to help my skill improve. In fact, I will try one of those 365 projects next year, yet all with film. There will be a delay, of course, between the actual shots and the scanning/posting process. (Yes, scanning). I believe I have rambled on enough.
Of course, if someone wants to gift me a D90 for "review", I wouldn't turn it down! ;-)