?

Log in

Debate - Digital vs Analog - Shutterbugs 'R Us [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
lensjunkie

[ website | Lensbox Studios ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Debate - Digital vs Analog [Feb. 26th, 2004|01:00 pm]
lensjunkie

lensjunkie

[medraught]
Something that has probably been rehashed time and time again, but something I want to discuss nonetheless.

What are the pros and cons of digital vs analog... Some thoughts; feel free to add or expand on them:

Digital:

  • is initially more expensive, but for the average man on the street, saves a fortune in printing costs later on.

  • with a good set of rechargeable batteries, you can keep going for a long long time...

  • depending on the camera quality, a good substitute for standard print quality photographs.

  • allows for instant review

  • allows for deletion

  • allows for quick editing

  • more forgiving, cost wise, when it comes to being trigger happy

  • more portable

  • ideal for beginners and snapshot shutterbugs

  • is not always suited to low-light photography (depending on the camera and the compensation grain it introduces)

  • is hampered by slower reaction speeds unless you're using a top class camera

  • is often not TTL and thus viewfinder vs LCD conflicts occur

  • breeds lazy habits in photographers that click away without thought of composition and lighting (even I am guilty of this)

  • medium and large format kits are hideously expensive

  • have complex UI's and too many buttons to confuse a new user that has maybe switched from an older, simpler SLR or compact camera


Analog, on the other hand, the old workhorse of the photographic world, also has it's pros and cons:

  • film and development costs can be daunting to an unwary shutterbug

  • older SLR camera's are complex in their simplicity and sometimes feel very awkward and unwieldy

  • newer SLR's are expensive and dedicated lenses are very expensive

  • very few people have their own darkrooms anymore or know the processes needed to develop and print their own works

  • you have to wait till you get your films developed and printed to see your results

  • they require patience and understanding of techniques because it's pointless wasting an entire spool to get one good photo

  • they're faster than most digital cameras

  • they force you to compose scenes through the viewfinder and not an LCD, and TTL viewfinders give you a better idea of the scene anyway

  • compact camera's are a dime a dozen and fairly decent most of the time, requiring less technical knowledge of photography to achieve a relatively decent image

I use both. Digital compacts and analog compact and SLR. I do more experimental work in digital and portraiture and more traditional work with the analogs.

Ok, now it's your turn... Your thoughts are welcome.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: yesterdayshigh
2004-09-29 08:50 am (UTC)
I agree with what your saying. Im in the process of buying a good quality digital camera but I could never part with my old (and by old i mean OLD) slr. Thing is, i can ask 4 a digital camera for my 18th b'day but not 50 films with processing!
(Reply) (Thread)