Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Rangefinder Forum > Film vs Digital

Film vs Digital Discussions about the relative advantages and disadvantages of Film vs Digital are important as they can help us understand our choices as photographers. Each medium has strengths and weaknesses which can best be used in a given circumstance. While this makes for an interesting and useful discussion, DO NOT attack others who disagree with you. Forum rules are explained in the RFF FAQ linked at the top of each page.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Keanu Reeves on film vs digital
Old 03-21-2012   #1
porktaco
Registered User
 
porktaco's Avatar
 
porktaco is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,433
Keanu Reeves on film vs digital

__________________
- Adam

M digital, M film, X digital.

More photos at my flickr, some of which is friends & family only. Please feel free to message me to become a flickr friend.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/49274520@N04/sets/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #2
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,296
Better Neo would start saving film from Smiths.
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #3
dexdog
sans bokeh
 
dexdog's Avatar
 
dexdog is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,379
all i can say is "whoa"
__________________
_____________________
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #4
dogberryjr
[Pithy phrase]
 
dogberryjr's Avatar
 
dogberryjr is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: WV, USA
Posts: 1,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by dexdog View Post
all i can say is "whoa"
I came to say this.
__________________
M, LTM, FD, F, Film, Digital, MF . . . Jack of all, master of none.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #5
David_Manning
Registered User
 
David_Manning's Avatar
 
David_Manning is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Aledo, Texas
Age: 48
Posts: 1,410
He's feeling nostalgia. And, the pressure from the finance guys about burning film.

I DO agree, however, with printing. Even a disorganized shoebox full of 4x6s is a surprising pleasure to browse. Even if negatives are lost or destroyed, the image remains physically, in print. Honestly, I don't think I have my wedding negatives from 23 years ago, but we have some framed prints and a book of 4x6s which we cherish as fine art.

I think the highest form of our "art" (still photography) is the printed image. It's unfinished until that point...and it doesn't matter how the image was made.
__________________
My Tumblr site
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #6
umcelinho
Marcelo
 
umcelinho's Avatar
 
umcelinho is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sao Paulo
Age: 31
Posts: 1,365
__________________
Gear:
• right eye
• right index finger
• cameras & lenses

What I've seen around: flickr

  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #7
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,017
Well ... 'Canoe's' stature in the movie industry is similar to peanut butter's importance to the culinary arts IMO!
__________________
---------------------------
zenfolio

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #8
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,097
I agree 100%. It's sad seeing digital replacing film for movies. When you see a movie like Barry Lyndon, which had large portions filmed w/ just candles and natural light, you see how beautiful and wondrous film stock is in the hands of an artist. Sucky colors, blown highlights, no shadow detail, lack of tonal quality...I refuse to watch digital movies. Just can't tolerate the "new technology" I guess. Well, we all have our standards.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #9
Jack Conrad
Registered User
 
Jack Conrad's Avatar
 
Jack Conrad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,344
It's always the spirit behind the skin of things that matters.

Not the object, but the intent an object is imbued with.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #10
David_Manning
Registered User
 
David_Manning's Avatar
 
David_Manning is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Aledo, Texas
Age: 48
Posts: 1,410
Film doesn't "bloom" like digital does in the highlights, which I think gives it a much more organic look...one that I like.

BUT...I see older movies which were scanned for bluray...and they look terrible. HD digital movies have an incredible sharpness to them, which is a feast for my eyes on a home-theater screen.

My favorite to view is new-technology movies, filmed on film stock, and then ARRI-laser-scanned. They are sharp, and you get to enjoy the grain too.
__________________
My Tumblr site
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #11
Griffin
Grampa's cameras user
 
Griffin's Avatar
 
Griffin is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 493
I think It's nicely put by mr Reeves. Especially the mass thing.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #12
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,094
More longing and yearning for the days of old...
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #13
Sparrow
Stewart McBride
 
Sparrow's Avatar
 
Sparrow is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perfidious Albion
Age: 62
Posts: 11,242
Mmmm ... peanut butter, with a nice orvieto ... just to stop it sticking to the roof of ones' mouth you understand
__________________
Regards Stewart

Stewart McBride



You’re only young once, but one can always be immature.

flickr stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #14
shadowfox
Personal Photography
 
shadowfox's Avatar
 
shadowfox is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,338
That's a bit more profound than what I expected when I read the title of this thread
He uses the word 'photochemical' not 'analog' or 'film' ... I just though that's interesting.

"Whoa" indeed...
__________________
Have a good light,
Will


  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #15
shadowfox
Personal Photography
 
shadowfox's Avatar
 
shadowfox is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
More longing and yearning for the days of old...
Or a reminder that the latest and greatest is not necessarily those for everything.
__________________
Have a good light,
Will


  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #16
Paul Luscher
Registered User
 
Paul Luscher is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 650
'Course, the diff is, we're shooting still instead of motion pics, so some of what he says is not applicable...

Well, I shoot both film and digital,and each has its good points. I do like digital for low light work--it seems to do a much better job of picking up shadow detail than film ever did. Also, at an average cost of $15 for each roll of film shot (Purchase of film and processing price), digital doesn't do that kind of damage to my back account --after you get over the initial costs.

Plus, there's the advantage of not having to haul along a load of filters. And I love that fact you can change ISOs on you camera to reflect whatever shooting situation you're in, rather than having to change out film in your camera, or carry multiple camera holding different ISO film.

But I admit there's still something special about shooting film--probably 'cause that's how I started out. Shooting film always has a more tactile feel to me, for lack of a better word. Also, 36 frames on a roll slows you down a bit when shooting, and makes you think a bit more carefully before you hit the button. Actually. that can make shooting a bit more relaxing. Digital makes it way too easy to shoot and the whole thing can sometimes feel more like a race than a pleasant excursion. And then, instead of being able to quickly pick out 5 or 6 good ones off a sheet of 36, you may have to wade through 200 or 300 images, which can lead to burnout...
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #17
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfox View Post
Or a reminder that the latest and greatest is not necessarily those for everything.
Of course, but you have to weigh the pros and cons...
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #18
Gary Sandhu
Registered User
 
Gary Sandhu's Avatar
 
Gary Sandhu is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 458
Some others' thoughts here (originally, I was trying to find out who really wrote that- I admit I was surprised Reeves really did)
http://m.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign...n&type=article
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #19
paulfish4570
Registered User
 
paulfish4570's Avatar
 
paulfish4570 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: On the Locust Fork of the Warrior River, Alabama
Age: 63
Posts: 9,606
i think keanu did a fine job. this thoughtful item is not what i expected from his movie persona. he clearly is much brighter than i previously thought.
__________________
i show what i see ...
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #20
timor
Registered User
 
timor is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_Manning View Post
I think the highest form of our "art" (still photography) is the printed image. It's unfinished until that point...and it doesn't matter how the image was made.
So right you are.

Usage of film in making movies, romantic or not, will lose in one major department: digital is cheaper. And that's all what for Hollywood movies makers counts most. We will see more and more digitally sharp movies with fuzzy of flat ideas directed at unsophisticated mass market. The only interesting thing about them is how far creators imagination can go with all this computer generated special effects. As for now each next movie is more graphic and more impossible than the previous one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #21
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 3,205
I think I feel the same thing when I'm using a film camera vs. a digital one. Its not a feeling I've let deter me from moving on to digital, but I do strongly miss that sensory thing of loading the film, feeling the smooth tension in the film winder, and the anticipation of using up one of the 36 valuable exposures. And the image quality questions...

BUT... BIG BUT: Digital is getting better and better with each new techno-marvelous camera that comes out. Yes, there will be the inevitable wacky bells and whistles used to attract the masses. But the ever-improving image quality and operating capability across a huge range of conditions is a good thing, IMO, of course.
__________________
Talk to a stranger today.

Ricoh GR; Nikon 1 V3; D600; Speed Graphic; Polaroid 250
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #22
DougFord
and then what happened??
 
DougFord's Avatar
 
DougFord is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: over Macho Grande
Posts: 613
"I often feel a photochemical image contains the mass of the subject and dimension"
Film is my density
__________________

the walk
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #23
zauhar
Registered User
 
zauhar's Avatar
 
zauhar is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,847
That was an intelligent and beautiful statement.

For some reason it is easy to make fun of Keanu (iconic roles? sometimes wooden acting?) but I think he has a lot of talent and is under-appreciated.

Randy
__________________
Philadelphia, PA
Leica M3/50mm DR Summicron/21mm SuperAngulon/
90mm Elmarit
Canon 7/50mm f1.4
Leica IIIf/Summitar/Collapsible Summicron
Yashica Electro 35
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #24
bigeye
Registered User
 
bigeye's Avatar
 
bigeye is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
More longing and yearning for the days of old...
I still have a place in my heart for Gbs of cheap, fast and unimportant digital images.

.
__________________
Anything that is very simple is apt to be sloppy. - Elliott Erwitt

I bought a new camera. It's so advanced you don't even need it. - Steven Wright
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2012   #25
tomtofa
Registered User
 
tomtofa's Avatar
 
tomtofa is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Well ... 'Canoe's' stature in the movie industry is similar to peanut butter's importance to the culinary arts IMO!
Now you've mad him sad as he eats his PB sandwich...
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 23:29.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.