This is kind of a slippery question, because some of us get our income via the sales of our photography as art at museums and galleries in addition to regular commercial venues. I shot an annual report recently completely with a Canon 5D MKII and various L lenses. In days of old, I've shot similar subjects for the same client with 35mm and 120 Kodachrome with a Canon F1-N and a Hasselblad system, and a 4x5 studio camera with an array of lenses from 75mm for architectural stuff, to a 210mm for product shots.
The Canon 5D MKII shot all of the product shots extremely well. My client was able to see the images the evening of the shoots, where with film they'd have to wait a number of days. I'm sure this story is being told all over the world and I'm but one manifestation of this shift.
However, there are times when film is the only way to go. For an example, I recently needed some 4'x5' prints for an exhibition and they needed to be loaded with subtle detail. The 5D did not have the resolution for prints that large and out came the 4x5 camera. The negatives were scanned on a high resolution flatbed scanner.
I have an upcoming project that needs lots of detail again. I bought ten boxes of Polaroid Type 55 PN film when Polaroid went out of business and am going to use it all this summer. That film is sublime with its detail and tonal range, especially when coupled with impeccably sharp Schneider optics. The 5D can't come near to what this film can render with intricate detail in large prints.
Anyone up for popping some champagne when the last box of Type 55 is used? That's got to be worth a party.
Thanks,
Larry
Bookmarks