Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
Is this really a question? Different tools for different situations.
I recently made about a 5-mile hike around a very nice, scenic state park. I had the option of hauling 20 - 30 pounds of 4x5 gear plus a big tripod, about the same weight in MF gear, or taking my Canon G12 and a tiny tripod. Guess which one won? I saw maybe one picture where I would have liked a bigger gun. I'll make do just this once.
Peter Gomena
Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
What are you happy with? If you think digital is cheapening your experience then don't use it. It is improbable that a good photographer will rely only on photo shop to fix everything, or add every desirable effect. I cook with cast iron, light my camp with a kerosene lantern, and hunt with a musket, not because these are better tools, or the only true outdoor experience, but because I like to.
Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
Yes and Yes.
Catching a special shot with a digital that wouldn't have been feasible with a Graflex is gratifying. Composing a special shot, carefully checking exposure, light, background nuisances, then carefully framing and focusing on the ground glass is also very gratifying. It's equally exciting to see the resulting "negative" whether it's a .jpg file or a negative. It's not too unwelcome when someone likes the shot later either.
I processed 3100 digital "negatives" of my latest trip to France, enjoying 99% of what I'd carefully framed and shot while trying to avoid antennas, wires, trash cans that would mar a good shot of a 12the Century Fortified Chateau. Here is an example, the only editing on my part with Photosuite, was to rotate the photo and to reduce it in size so I can email.
At the moment, I'm really getting gratification from scanning the negs from my Graflex and a little Ensign folder that I was given in France by a good friend. My 4X6 cm negs are coming out great in color. I may have to carefully straighten the scan as the neg slid in the holder but I won't color correct, enhance, or manipulate the image too much as it appears to be good from the git-go.
The only real manipulation of the file, either film scan or digital, is to make a reduced size copy for emailing and for posting here. I print from my original (24X36 inch) digital image file. I scan my file at 1200 dpi for printing and archive and make a 600dpi copy to further reduce for email/internet use.
Even my digital, unless it's an opportunity shot, I compose as I would with my Graflex and film, just I'm able to devote more time to being a tourist with my wife. With film, I have so many shots of her back (she'd get tired of waiting), with digital I have a nice portrait for our remembrance folio. She does understand my love of the Graflex process so she is patient when I find a nice shot.
I'm new to LF and love it, I'm not new to film photography though and I'm really enjoying the aspects of handling film again. I also like digital. Guess I'm a traitor.
tom
Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
I shot my first B&W in 1953 and got my first camera in 1955. My dad taught me to process and print in 1958 and have worked as a professional since 1968. I've shot many thousands of rolls and sheets and processed and printed 99.9% of them. I've loved ever step of the process every time I've shot, processed and printed my film. I'm still as excited when I shoot film as I was as a kid. Like most commercial shooters my business has been almost totally digital since 2000. For several years I found it hard for me to warm up to digital for my personal work but preferred digital for most of my commercial work. There are simply too many reasons in my business why digital is the right choice much of the time. In the past year Ive warmed up to digital and now get great enjoyment shooting my personal work with it.
I shoot both film and digital with the same care one frame at a time. I feel every frame counts and really look down on those that shoot frames like a machine gun and try to find one they can fix in photoshop. I shoot only raw and look on photoshop as a way to design my own individual look. Unlike film I have the controll to effectively design my own emulsion.
Now rather than inserting a film holder I snap my digital back on my view camera or on my Hasselblad depending on what I'm shooting or how I feel that day.
I have a totally different feeling about digital now and get great satisfaction shooting with it. I see it as just another path to the same destination.
Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
Oh absolutely though I don't use a digital camera "for convenience." I use it because with the print sizes I typically make, no larger than 20x30 and more commonly 16x20 or smaller, I can make technically excellent images and it has many advantages for me compared to a film camera in general and LF in particular - which I won't list here because I don't want to start a film vs digital argument but few of them are based on "convenience." It does have a major disadvantage - it isn't as enjoyable for me as composing and making an image with a LF camera especially 8x10. But it has its own satisfactions and the offsetting advantages are just too great for me to ignore.
Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Findingmyway4ever
Is this convenience something that brings one happiness in the end with respect to how they got from and to the final print?
Just because you can do things in post-processing, it doesn't mean you have to.
If you get a digital camera, simply go about your business exactly that you always have. Be deliberate and get it right in camera.
But with color work, post-processing gives me a lot of power that has not been readily available pre-digital. Neither film or digital necessarily capture scenes the way I see them artistically. And while it is a good skill to be able visualize scenes the way my film or digital will render them (and recognize worthy scenes in that light), I don't see why I necessarily have to be captive to that either. With post-processing, I can now selectively adjust color (hue, saturation, and/or luminosity) to suit my artistic vision. I happen to find that tremendously gratifying.
Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Brian Ellis
It does have a major disadvantage - it isn't as enjoyable for me as composing and making an image with a LF camera especially 8x10. But it has its own satisfactions and the offsetting advantages are just too great for me to ignore.
I'm using a dslr for my current project, more for economic reasons than for convenience ... LF color film and processing costs put it out of reach. The digital workflow is brilliantly convenient, but I don't find the camera to be. I'm basically using it as if it were an LF camera that happens to have a tiny, dim ground glass. I don't think it's speeding me up in the field at all.
Is it gratifying? Hell yeah. Not so much the focussing, but the rest of the process ...
Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
paulr
I'm using a dslr for my current project, more for economic reasons than for convenience ... LF color film and processing costs put it out of reach. The digital workflow is brilliantly convenient, but I don't find the camera to be. I'm basically using it as if it were an LF camera that happens to have a tiny, dim ground glass. I don't think it's speeding me up in the field at all.
Is it gratifying? Hell yeah. Not so much the focussing, but the rest of the process ...
Shoot tethered, easy on the eyes for focusing, still much faster than LF plus the advantage of reading the actual raw data, not the jpg histogram from the camera lcd. I find I work much more efficiently tethered.
Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bdkphoto
Shoot tethered, easy on the eyes for focusing, still much faster than LF plus the advantage of reading the actual raw data, not the jpg histogram from the camera lcd. I find I work much more efficiently tethered.
I can see that working in many situations but it would be a hassle for me. For one thing my only computer is a mac workstation ...
I think just an upgrade to a better dslr would make a big difference.
Re: Is there any gratification in using the digital camera for convenience?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
paulr
I can see that working in many situations but it would be a hassle for me. For one thing my only computer is a mac workstation ...
I think just an upgrade to a better dslr would make a big difference.
Yeah, there's that.
I have friends that use their MacPro towers on location ;-)) a bit of overkill for me.