I am always reading that I should have the latest digital camera because it's so much better than the one I have. It will have two memory slots and produce even higher resolution picures etc.
Then I read film is better, purer, or that it slows you down so you can appreciate the art of photography.
For me, I want to use the best tool, that makes economical sense, for the job. A new feature or capabilty needs to be cost effective.
At the moment a Nikon D700 and good lenses provide what I need. I can hire kit if I really need something extra.
Higher resolution and faster frame rate. I can print my pictures big enough, even when I crop them a bit. I have never needed double digit frame rates. The motorsport I have photographed didn't need more than the older cameras I used could provide. Other sports might need it.
Coming back to film, I don't shoot fast. I take my time and ensure I have it right. So I have never understood the reasoning behind film making you a better photographer by slowing you down.
Then there is the developing. Either do it yourself or send it off. Maybe that's what is meant by slowing you down.
If you want to share on line you'll need to scan them. Will scanning and any manipultion mean you remove some of the film "uniqueness"?
At the end of the day; if you are happy, keep doing it.
Please add your address to my mailing list, or click the follow button to be kept informed about future posts.
Follow me on twitter.
Follow me on twitter.
Leave a comment about this post. I would really appreciate your thoughts on this or any blog post.
