Digital & Film comparison..

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by digitalandfilm, Sep 17, 2013.

  1. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    • Like Like x 2
  2. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    you seem to be rather inept in handling film exposure and scanning if that's your results

    here are some of mine:

    digital on left, negative film on right. Each of the images in the array on the right is over exposed by one more stop than the previous

    sample.

    then some more details if you (or anyone else) happen to be interested
    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2010/02/colour-version.html
    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2009/05/digital-vs-film-scans-screens-and.html

    Don't get me wrong and assume I am bashing digital, I have quite a lot of interest in Digital too. To me its not which is the best system, its which is the best system for the job. Sometimes that's Negative film

    PS: your blown cloud highlights are classic digital problems ;-)
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 1
  3. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    941
    Oct 20, 2011
    btw, Not to be a jerk digital and film. You need to clean your sensor. Upper right corner has a sensor smudge blob.

    LOL when I went to look at it closer in Flickr, I go the message that the image falls outside of my safe search filter. Didn't even know flickr had one. That's one dirty landscape sir.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. CiaranCReilly

    CiaranCReilly Mu-43 Veteran

    481
    Oct 18, 2012
    Dublin
    Ciaran Reilly
    Thanks for posting, digitalandfilm, it was an interesting comparison.

    I did read your blog post and found it a good read, and a more rigorous run through than the OP's, so thanks for that, although your methods were questioned in the comments too :wink:
     
  5. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    Thought it was flare- cleaned it today. :smile:
     
  6. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    Pellicle- I'm inept at lots of things...

    Quick & Dirty test of A77 and Spotmatic- nothing more.
     
  7. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    BTW- the Fuji greens are very nice.. Gotta try the good stuff they have (this was Walmart Fuji film)
     
  8. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    :)

    I surprised some friends at how darn good an image I got from a humble Olympus trip 35mm on supermarket grade neg. Scanning is an art in many ways. Don't let the software do too much.

    Anyway this is a u4/3 forum so let's not go on about film here ;-)

    BTW, since my blog post above I've gone away from Canon in APS and use GH1 / GF1 as its a heap easier to carry and the legacy lenses (such as off your spotmatic) work wonders :)

    3712918693_f72481d1a1_z_d.
     

    Attached Files:

  9. caspert79

    caspert79 Mu-43 Regular

    34
    Sep 4, 2013
    Netherlands
    Quiz. Next picture: film or digital?

    a0e577b954084b061726358f42d8b023_287.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 1
  10. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Dunno, its a nice composition though ... shadows well handled and there aren't any possibilities to see highlights that are telltale.

    Based on the look around the bar stool I'll swing out and say film.

    But what captured it isn't really important to me. Its the result.
     
  11. LovinTheEP2

    LovinTheEP2 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    619
    Feb 15, 2011
    Toronto
    Good idea but just goes to show how much PP plays a part and different film rendering.

    Which scene is more representative of what it actually looked like that day. I'd guess the film version.

    I still like film rendering so much better but digital is soooo much more practical and at the end of the day, people are more interested in artistic interpretation (lr, ps) then just getting the best IQ and exact color reproduction of the scene (for the most part).
     
  12. madmaxmedia

    madmaxmedia Mu-43 Veteran

    335
    Feb 20, 2010
    How can we really compare the 2 pictures, when they were taken at different times in the day? (different lighting)

    Interesting comparison though, thanks for posting! If you put the digital pic through VSCO, it would probably look just like the 2nd (lighting differences notwithstanding.)
     
  13. CiaranCReilly

    CiaranCReilly Mu-43 Veteran

    481
    Oct 18, 2012
    Dublin
    Ciaran Reilly
    I think Caspert's photo is digital, because of the fine detail around the stool. It's a very nice shot, more importantly.
     
  14. alex66

    alex66 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    715
    Jul 23, 2010
    This is interesting but there are a lot of flavours of film and they will give different results, with a Raw file it is possible to get very close to certain films rendering of a scene. That being if you want to go that way and its a great deal easier to do a good digital print over a C print or even a Cibachrome, though no gloss material comes close to Cibas they were just devine. Now with mono I still preffer to do it all old school wet prints etc, personally I prefer it.
     
  15. RDM

    RDM Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mmmmm Film ... Delicious.

    I still prefer to do it all old school wet prints too.
     
  16. sun12321

    sun12321 Mu-43 Regular

    33
    Nov 1, 2010
    It looks like you are confused.
    The image process of film and digital is totally difference.

    If you scan from film to digital here, then you need to manage your scanner.
    Before taking the picture on film, please attach your GND or CPL filter to your film or may need to add colour filter too.
    And you may need to choose correct iso film too.

    No doubt that, digital world is easy to manage the image. However, there are many different films that suit for different occasions. At film's age, one body was not enough.

    Enjoy :)
     
  17. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Hi

    did you see the post here where a fellow was showing his "ultimate travel kit" and it had 4 bodies? (plus chargers and non-interchangable proprietary batterys ;-)

    Personally I'd have cut it down to two ...
     
  18. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    Here's two- one digital and one film with the same Super Takumar 50mm:

    Real Film followed by Digital...
     

    Attached Files:

  19. caspert79

    caspert79 Mu-43 Regular

    34
    Sep 4, 2013
    Netherlands
    Thanks a lot! I agree that the results are more important than the means. Actually, this picture was shot on film. More specifically, I shot it with an OM-2 with a Vivitar Series 1 70-210/3.5. The negative was scanned with a Leaf 45 scanner, which is old and slow, but still a very good scanner.

    My point is: I see all kinds of comparisons on the internet between digital and scanned film. The scanned film usually looks terrible. Mostly it's a combination of a not so great scanner, the wrong scanning settings and sometimes a technically bad shot to begin with. My conclusion: film and digital are both great means of photography, but in the case of film (and more particularly film scanning) the chance of error is simply much bigger.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Muntjack

    Muntjack Mu-43 Veteran

    200
    Jul 26, 2010
    I have recently been inspired to start using my beloved OM-1 again and am quite pleased with some of the results (thought I'd be disappointed with the IQ after using digital). The sense of freedom from menus, screens and batteries is wonderful.
    However, I am interested in getting a decent negative scanner. Can anyone here point me at a reasonable one which is also affordable?
    M