Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Includes seascape, panorama and travel photography
X
-
Tags: None
-
Thanks Greg. My interest was piqued by people claiming that film was better than digital. I remembered that I had an old Minolta SLR and a couple of lenses so I tried a few rolls. Because there were so few places processing film, I bought some processing gear and tried processing b&w, then colour negative, then colour reversal. I have also since acquired a couple of what were expensive cameras in their day.
Film is different but I don't think it's better, although I couldn't describe the difference. My results with medium format film seem to give about same level of detail as my D800. I have enjoyed working with film but digital is much more convenient. I will probably continue to dabble in film.
Comment
-
Good luck with it, I did my own 35mm slides on Fujichrome and processed E6 for a number of years. I was happy with the results but digital is so much easier and I'm so much lazier!
-
Greg: I processed my own Ektachrome using E3 process many years ago. That required many more steps.
Alan: I can't afford a high end scanner and I think I get better results than the Epson V750/850 series. I end up with an approx 150MP image by stitching multiple partial shots of the film frame. This is much larger than the 36MP D800 image but, to my eyes, has only slightly more detail than a D800 image due to film grain. Detail and sharpness of both MF film and D800 is more than adequate for my needs.
Digital will definitely remain my primary medium but it has been an interesting exercise. I will probably continue with film for B&W.
-
Comment