Digital photography is very cool. Immediate feedback. Quick access to editing. Printing at home with no chemicals. Cool. New. Sexy. Now video capability in new digital SLRs. BRILLIANT, INCREDIBLE, AMAZING STUFF. Expensive inks. Expensive bodies. Need to have computers and storage and files might be corrupt. Frequent equipment failures. If you don’t back up your photos, you can lose them all quickly.
Film photography. Chemicals. Paper. Lower cost for bodies. Lenses that feel wonderful to focus. Many still work without electronics. Analog. Picture emerges from film then re-emerges from paper in the darkroom – wicked cool when you think about it. BRILLIANT, INCREDIBLE, AMAZING STUFF. More expensive paper. Film processing and costs. No computers or ink.
There is no winner. Picking one over the other is rather stupid. Yep. I said it. Use them as you wish. Both are very good for serious people. Advertising will likely drive your choice. Economics, maybe.
Anyway, I think film photography should go away just like I think:
- Acoustic guitars all needed to go away after the electric guitar showed up.
- The gas range should have gone the way of the dinosaurs after electric ranges came on the scene.
- Foot racing was replaced by horse racing and car racing replaced horse racing. Watching people run is stupid.
- Pencils and pens should have all been eliminated now in favor of the computer. We don’t need them anymore.
- Oil paints and watercolors should have all been eliminated now in favor of the computer. We don’t need them anymore.
- Pianos. Who needs them when you can have a nice big organ or the modern keyboard? They’re the same but better.
- Real restaurant fare when you can just eat from a microwave. Why bother?
As long as there are electrons and film, I’ll be using both. Both are tools. They express things differently.
This is the most idiotic thing I’ve ever seen.
By the way, their rather over the top “test” was done with a Nikon F5 and a Nikon D700.
