Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 66

Thread: Film is dead?

  1. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    leepublic of singapore
    Posts
    1,783

    Default

    Originally posted by tomshen
    Funny, the biggest film lover singing for digital and the biggest digi lover singing for film.

    Anyway it's just a preference, like how we cook our food. Either way, we just want something to eat comforably. Dun bother which way better. Today I want some rice, and tomorrow I want some bread. All in all, we try both! It would be boring if there is no choice at all.
    yah......i agree......cos i think so much which one shud i get...dslr or slr......either way...there's no loss/gain. and im still back @ square 1.

  2. #42

    Default Re: Film is dead... absolutely

    Originally posted by sriram
    Not. The same old digital vs film argument again and again.

    Let me give you an example. I bought a used Kodak P&S digicam about 3 yrs ago. The original owner paid $1500 for it. I got it for $450 after it was used for 8 months. When I sold it, I got $100, including batteries, charger, CF reader, etc. That's a 93% loss in 3+ years. Today's $1000 digicams can blow my (ex) Kodak away. I don't expect this trend to change any time soon. You lose more $$ when you upgrade your DSLR.

    OTOH I purchased an EOS-630 for $275 (with a lens and flash), and sold it after a couple of years for $250 (without lens), when I upgraded. I can live with this kind of a loss.
    This analogy is only valid for the time period in which it occured. 3years ago->present.

    When even consumer digicams equal 35mm film in image quality, there will no longer be such depreciation, since there is little reason to upgrade to something better. By that time, 35mm film cameras would be the ones that are nearly worthless.

    I believe the future trend will be that digicams will start to hold more and more value after the 6MP level(or when image quality differences are no longer an issue) as long as their bodies have similar abilities as their film counterparts.

  3. #43

    Default

    Yeah, that's what I thought when I was rushing to upgrade my 8088 to the latest 286 chip. Man, that was all I was ever going to need... period! And it was so cheap, only $3K plus... it'll never get cheaper.

  4. #44

    Default

    I was packing my room the other day for the coming Chinese New Year & I came across alot of old pictures(some still in very good condition) of myself when I was very young and pictures of my mom, uncles and my grandmother etc.........Some of these pictures are more than 40years ago. Its really nice to go thru all these pictures and seeing it, it also reminds me to shoot more and capture more of my daily life and event so that my son and grandson might be able to go thru them and enjoy them.

    Sometimes I dont print and I store them into some cd. And yes i know that now cds are very common and cheap and every pc comes with a cdrom. But lets say 40 years later.......when my grandson would be packing his room for his coming Chinese New Year and he comes across some cds that I have compiled 40 years ago, would he be able to play them on his cdrom player? Would his pc have a cdrom? Just take alook at the 'big floopy' that we used about 10years ago. No pc have that size anymore. Even the normal size floopy that we use are getting cheaper and lesser. It might not even come as a norm in our pc maybe in 5 years time.

    I am not saying film or digital is better and even if we do print out our pictures it might not last as long as 40 years.

    Just wanna share my thoughts with you guys after all we are all here for a common thing and thats photography. Sometimes we can get side track and group ourselves by the brand we use. Lets not forget the common interest that brought us together........

  5. #45

    Default

    I agree CK, in fact I am waiting for an affordable digital solution for my shooting needs - I'm not anti digital. It is just not here for me yet. Guess I will wait another 2-3 years.

    Originally posted by ckiang
    Well, I was once anti-digital. I still shoot film, but seriously consider going digital.
    ...
    ...

  6. #46

    Default Re: Re: Film is dead... absolutely

    I seriously doubt that. Look at computers today. I am yet to come across one model whose price doesn't crash in a few years' time. There will always be improvements, and breakthroughs, as you see happening even now.

    Yes, my film SLR may be worth little, but I paid very little for it anyway, so no big loss. In fact I will probably keep it as well... when I get a DSLR.

    Originally posted by Zerstorer
    I believe the future trend will be that digicams will start to hold more and more value after the 6MP level(or when image quality differences are no longer an issue) as long as their bodies have similar abilities as their film counterparts.

  7. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Western SG
    Posts
    1,537

    Default

    Originally posted by freshfire
    I was packing my room the other day for the coming Chinese New Year & I came across alot of old pictures(some still in very good condition) of myself when I was very young and pictures of my mom, uncles and my grandmother etc.........Some of these pictures are more than 40years ago. Its really nice to go thru all these pictures and seeing it, it also reminds me to shoot more and capture more of my daily life and event so that my son and grandson might be able to go thru them and enjoy them.

    Sometimes I dont print and I store them into some cd. And yes i know that now cds are very common and cheap and every pc comes with a cdrom. But lets say 40 years later.......when my grandson would be packing his room for his coming Chinese New Year and he comes across some cds that I have compiled 40 years ago, would he be able to play them on his cdrom player? Would his pc have a cdrom? Just take alook at the 'big floopy' that we used about 10years ago. No pc have that size anymore. Even the normal size floopy that we use are getting cheaper and lesser. It might not even come as a norm in our pc maybe in 5 years time.

    I am not saying film or digital is better and even if we do print out our pictures it might not last as long as 40 years.

    Just wanna share my thoughts with you guys after all we are all here for a common thing and thats photography. Sometimes we can get side track and group ourselves by the brand we use. Lets not forget the common interest that brought us together........
    Side track... After reading your post, I just want to share the benefits of digital that affects me:
    1) a photographer using a DSLR to capture the Sept 11 event. The image was there for the wife to know what her husband was doing till the moment he goes....

    2) I'm shooting digital now every weekend to remember my father when I visit him, I can shoot all I want and develop the nice one for him to view as well as for my kids down the road....
    Why is that so.... cause my dad suffer from alzheimer's disease...

  8. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Farrer Road
    Posts
    354

    Default

    off-topic .. are the Sept 11 digital photos available for viewing somewhere? or kept privately by the wife now?

  9. #49

    Default

    Similar thread on the leica forum on photo.net --> http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-...?msg_id=004QjJ

    For me, i'm still sticking to film for the time being as a personal preference (e.g Some people prefer instant results that digital provides, i still love the feeling of anticipation when i get my prints or negatives back). Film vs digital.... canon vs nikon... zeiss vs leitz.... i don't care..... as long as i'm happy and satisfied with my own equipment/photos.

  10. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Zimbabwe
    Posts
    1,056

    Default

    Funny why I prefer things from the yester years. Eg: I prefer mechanical watches to digital/battery watches coz somehow it seems "alive" and is more precious to me and easy to grow attached to than something that runs on batteries, even though it may not be as accurate or reliable. Same is the case with a manual car as you seem to be more in control even though there are more steps involved compared to automatic. So as a hobby, the involvement and less complicated electronics of a manual mechanical film camera is what makes photography fun and more "alive" to me. I take my time to compose my shots. I am not a professional so film performance is alerady more than enough for me. If I wanted many snap shots then i think I will have no choice but to go digital or maybe get a video camera even.

  11. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,058

    Default

    what's the next big leap in technology? organic IT? where data is not encoded on media but like synapses touch-n-connect?
    I think if polaroid was cheaper and had better quality digital wd just be another contender. the main thing is info closure. INSTANT GRATIFICATION.
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  12. #52
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    ...Not So Far Away
    Posts
    82

    Default

    The "desktop darkroom" factor is another important advantage in favour of digital. I've never been a fan of the cramped, smelly, dim, chemical darkroom, although the alchemical experience of darkroom techniques to manipulate final prints has an element of "fun" in the "experimental-like" process... if you screw up and $$$ goes down the drain, it can also tax the patience. Most journalists, for example, love the laptop lab, even those who resort to scanning film negatives to digitise pictures for editing/enhancing rather than first-hand via a digicam. Any photog who thinks a photo originally taken is final, is missing half the joy of photography.

  13. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by tomshen
    Funny, the biggest film lover singing for digital and the biggest digi lover singing for film.

    Anyway it's just a preference, like how we cook our food. Either way, we just want something to eat comforably. Dun bother which way better. Today I want some rice, and tomorrow I want some bread. All in all, we try both! It would be boring if there is no choice at all.
    Someone I know is a big digital fan when he started with a consumer digicam, upgraded to a prosumer DSLR and all of a sudden..... whaddyaknow? He "upgraded" to a pro film SLR in a while. Then he "upgraded" to 1950's film SLR....

    Regards
    CK

  14. #54

    Default

    I prefer digital cuz..I like to experiment with my shots...

    But a big plus for digital is that I can keep all in a PC nicely sorted in respective folders and the ability for the OS to view the thumbnails.

    Lastly I took the digital route, cuz I can post it on the net instantly...or post in forums like CS for others to comment and improve my photographic skills.

    Cost aside, it's the matter of what you want out of the equipment you own.... no point having an F1 on the roads of Sg, a nice toyota will do.

    So try not to compare FM2 to 1Ds (plus whatever setup needed). Cuz most ppl develops no bigger than 4R normally, a 2-4Mp digicam will suffice... cost wise it's still very affordable.

    It's those "prosumers" that have the headachs. Imagine that you take a full screen view of your digitized photo...it's roughly equivilant to an 8R... then ppl start to nickpick about resol and pic quality and digital processes.

    The pros does not have this problem cuz they juz use the most suitable equipments that can earn them $$$... they treat their equipments as investments.

    That being said, I do have my gripes on digital photography....
    Battery life, HDD crash, corrupted files..etc.
    Gallery | Facebook Page Spreading the Good photography.

  15. #55
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Originally posted by CYRN
    I prefer digital cuz..I like to experiment with my shots...

    But a big plus for digital is that I can keep all in a PC nicely sorted in respective folders and the ability for the OS to view the thumbnails.

    Lastly I took the digital route, cuz I can post it on the net instantly...or post in forums like CS for others to comment and improve my photographic skills.

    Cost aside, it's the matter of what you want out of the equipment you own.... no point having an F1 on the roads of Sg, a nice toyota will do.

    So try not to compare FM2 to 1Ds (plus whatever setup needed). Cuz most ppl develops no bigger than 4R normally, a 2-4Mp digicam will suffice... cost wise it's still very affordable.

    It's those "prosumers" that have the headachs. Imagine that you take a full screen view of your digitized photo...it's roughly equivilant to an 8R... then ppl start to nickpick about resol and pic quality and digital processes.

    The pros does not have this problem cuz they juz use the most suitable equipments that can earn them $$$... they treat their equipments as investments.

    That being said, I do have my gripes on digital photography....
    Battery life, HDD crash, corrupted files..etc.
    Damm the Batteries suckers

  16. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Originally posted by jasonpgc
    Damm the Batteries suckers
    soon you will bow to those battery suckers.
    like the handphone you carry today.

    Need to charge battery? just wear a sheet of thin film photovoltaic, clip it on your bag or hat. No worry about hauling stack of spare batteries, as long as you're outdoor.
    See here

    Probably somebody will be interested to produce clubsnapper's "wearable digicam charger"

  17. #57

    Default

    Originally posted by tsdh
    Need to charge battery? just wear a sheet of thin film photovoltaic, clip it on your bag or hat. No worry about hauling stack of spare batteries, as long as you're outdoor.
    See here

    Probably somebody will be interested to produce clubsnapper's "wearable digicam charger"
    Man, I've been waiting for that technology to come to market for donkey's years... all those promises. Lithium has fulfilled the promise.

    A word of warning about depending on solar energy. I remember way back when my friend walked into the examination hall with a solar powered calculator. It kind of went wonk on him, and he could be seen periodically throughout the whole exam holding it up to the light, then quickly doing a few calculations before it died again. Some of us thought he was making offerings to the exam gods.

  18. #58
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    ...Not So Far Away
    Posts
    82

    Exclamation

    wah seh... i did a search and found solar batt chargers being sold now... good for camping etc...

    http://neatsolarstuff.com/aa-charger.htm
    http://www.global-merchants.com/home/11-one.htm

    anyone used them before?

  19. #59
    izux
    Guests

    Default

    Originally posted by StreetShooter


    I remember way back when my friend walked into the examination hall with a solar powered calculator. It kind of went wonk on him, and he could be seen periodically throughout the whole exam holding it up to the light, then quickly doing a few calculations before it died again. Some of us thought he was making offerings to the exam gods.

  20. #60
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Originally posted by StreetShooter
    A word of warning about depending on solar energy. I remember way back when my friend walked into the examination hall with a solar powered calculator. It kind of went wonk on him, and he could be seen periodically throughout the whole exam holding it up to the light, then quickly doing a few calculations before it died again. Some of us thought he was making offerings to the exam gods.

    yeah.. for indoor (or at night), there's no need to give offering to the light-god if using fully mechanical equipment. so keep your FM2.

    But like it or not, in the future, wearable photovoltaic charger will be a norm. a UK company has already done a research to weave textile using photovoltaic thread (they already showed a prototype of shirt capable generating electricity from surrounding lights).
    That's good news for digicam lovers

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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