Film mentality on a Digital....

[Anorakus]

Film cameras don't necessarily stop you from shooting indiscriminately. Press photographers would burn through hundreds of rolls of film because film is cheap compared to the value of the shots they're getting. For us amateurs, the cost of film and processing would tend to put a brake on shooting. This of course is largely absent with digital, unless you factor in the cost of storage in terms of cards, DVDs and hard drives.

For me, I would have to say that going digital has improved the quality of my shots, as I can review what I've taken and try again if I haven't got the desired exposure or framing how I want it. I used to bin 'faulty' slides where the exposure or focus was off, which typically left me with one or two shots on each roll that I was really pleased with, and the rest being 'OK'. My ratio of 'good' to 'OK' shots on digital is much better.

Using something like the 5D mk II in raw mode goes some way to recreate the shooting restrictions imposed by film, in terms of the sheer amount of data it creates and the difficulty in storing and manipulating it!

A.

 

[joxby]

I might drive 50 miles in the middle of the night to shoot a scape with a camera containing 3 shots of a part roll..

why would I need any more ?

The idea that I will miss the opportunity to capture what I planned for is unlikely, if the thing ain't there I can keep my 3 frames for another time, and if it is I will capture it as planned.

I don't feel the material pictures are shot on is the sole deciding factor.

So is it all about planning and intention, or do we just leave with every mortal piece of equipment we own, a blister pack of 32g cards / 2000 rolls of film and no idea what we are shooting..?