I'm not in that argument - I'm asking if turning a film shot into digital at ASDA to share it online loses some of the look of film, and it sounds like you're saying it does
Shooting film then editing in Photoshop - now that does seem a bit pointless, surely film editing should be in a darkroom
As for this bit...
I find the outcome and process of purely digital shooting to be quite puerile, unchallenging, impersonal, disconnecting and boring.I find the outcome and process of purely digital shooting to be quite puerile, unchallenging, impersonal, disconnecting and boring. All I can say is that you're nuts
Puerile - really? How about the silliness of traveling for hours and not knowing if you've got a good shot at all.
Unchallenging, compared to what? All photographers use metering, not sure where the challenge is there, and as film generally has a wider latitude anyway you can get your exposure very wrong indeed and still get a nice print.
Impersonal? Sending film off to a lab isn't impersonal then?
Disconnecting? Now you are taking the P - with digital's ability to see, review, change instantly you are totally connected.
Boring? If any aspect of creating great images is boring to you then surely you need a new hobby
And before anyone rants back at me please remember I shot film for 25 years or so before shooting digital, digital allows me the freedom to shoot differently and 'develop' my images exactly as I always wanted but couldn't do with film
I don't think there's anything wrong with film btw, its just different. If I shot film at all it'd be on MF or larger - I've always fancied a 645 as being the ideal film size for me; one day maybe it'll happen
But not yet
Dave