Sparrow
Mentor
... well that sums it up pretty much
kxl
Social Documentary
I embraced an all digital workflow for color images with my first digital camera about 15 years ago, and with the rare exception when I get a nostalgic impulse to shoot color slides, I shoot digital for color images.
For B&W, I still shoot Tri-X, HP5+ and Neopan 400, although I gave up dfarkroom printing a long time ago in favor of scanning film. However, for that past couple of years, I have been shooting B&W film with less frequency as I have become more adept with digital B&W conversion.
For B&W, I still shoot Tri-X, HP5+ and Neopan 400, although I gave up dfarkroom printing a long time ago in favor of scanning film. However, for that past couple of years, I have been shooting B&W film with less frequency as I have become more adept with digital B&W conversion.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Back in the dark ages of photography '70s, I used to make a lot of slide copies, for my art history lectures, of glass mounted originals in the university collection, using a dedicated slide copier. Of course it made more slides, but they were of very good quality, even when projected 15 feet across.
I have always wondered why scanning replaced digital photography? Just not possible? (you always seem to know these things)
I made lots of slide duplicates back in the day too, both for myself and for clients at the photofinishing shop I worked for. The issue with duplicating slides was always contrast growth and loss of resolution ... Kodak (and others) produced special films with lower contrast to help combat the contrast and color issues, which was mostly if not 100% successful. Analog materials are simply difficult to duplicate, analog to analog, with perfect fidelity.
Until recent years, using slide duplication*equipment with digital cameras was difficult because you'd get relatively low pixel count, or juggled with with mis-matched formats, etc. Most of the duplicators were set up for 1:1 magnification, which worked great when going 35->35 mm but become a bit of a pain with 35mm -> APS-C or other formats. Film scanners netted even illumination, a dedicated lens, improved resolution, etc etc.
Nowadays, though, with 16 to 24 Mpixel FF cameras (and beyond...) easily available, traditional slide duplicator equipment does very well. For large jobs, scanners continue to have value as you can automate scanning large numbers of slides more easily. Of course, capturing negatives (particularly color negatives) has its own issues when doing the reversal and rendering—good scanning software can help make you more efficient there in pretty dramatic ways. But using the camera to do duplication has its benefits too. So you have to pick which process works best for the particular job at hand.
This is more a business driven by technical needs than anything else. Capturing a film image to a digital rendering is more a matter of having the right equipment and the skills to use them to produce results than any romanticized notion of which media's aesthetics are superior.
G