Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Digital vs Analog B&W  (Read 3326 times)

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 832
Digital vs Analog B&W
« on: December 06, 2018, 01:30:13 pm »

I scanned recently some old negatives and worked on them in Ps.
I have the impression that those old things have lots of "body", of "substance", that I don't get with my digital camera
Of course I am inexperienced and maybe imagining things just because I don't master the techniques.
Any opinions?
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14363
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2018, 01:45:41 pm »

Ah, the beauty of getting a new member!

Your questions remind me of the old joke/saying about fashion: "New is just a well-forgotten old." ;)

In other words, that horse (analog vs. digital) has already been beaten to death multiple times. But I understand it might be new to you, and I am sure some members here will gladly jump to the opportunity to rehash the old :)

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 832
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2018, 01:55:06 pm »

Ah, the beauty of getting a new member!

Your questions remind me of the old joke/saying about fashion: "New is just a well-forgotten old." ;)

In other words, that horse (analog vs. digital) has already been beaten to death multiple times. But I understand it might be new to you, and I am sure some members here will gladly jump to the opportunity to rehash the old :)

Well, I guessed that, yes.
But if I have to ask myself each time if any of my questions has already beaten to death several times by the more experienced, I have also to ask myself what am I doing in a forum on photography at all.

Don't you think?  :)

Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14363
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2018, 01:57:26 pm »

... I have also to ask myself what am I doing in a forum on photography at all.

Oh, that one is easy: to show us more of your excellent photography.

Ivophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #4 on: December 06, 2018, 02:24:38 pm »

Well, I guessed that, yes.
But if I have to ask myself each time if any of my questions has already beaten to death several times by the more experienced, I have also to ask myself what am I doing in a forum on photography at all.

Don't you think?  :)

You can take over my stick in the Lula newbies steeplechase.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14363
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2018, 02:34:35 pm »

Next on your to-do (discuss) list:

How awesome it is that man landed on the Moon

CDs seem to sound harsher vs. LPs (coincidentally, another analog vs. digital subject)

The Beatles vs. Rolling Stones

Etc.

;)



faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 945
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2018, 02:38:41 pm »

You can take over my stick in the Lula newbies steeplechase.
The analog vs. digital debate has been beaten to death for years, though usually the discussion does not turn around black and white. I shoot both film and digital in black and white. I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and am not interested in more words on the subject. If you want to advocate for one or the other medium, show us your prints.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2018, 02:47:05 pm by faberryman »
Logged

Ivophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #7 on: December 06, 2018, 02:40:26 pm »

The analog vs. digital debate has been beaten to death for years, though usually the discussion does not turn around black and white. I shoot both film and digital in black and white. I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and am not interested in more words on the subject. If you want to advocate for one or the other mediums, show us your prints.

Why do you quote me on this? Iím not interested in the gear.
But I do recognize the newbie effect. 
Logged

Ivophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #8 on: December 06, 2018, 02:43:19 pm »

Next on your to-do (discuss) list:

How awesome it is that man landed on the Moon

CDs seem to sound harsher vs. LPs (coincidentally, another analog vs. digital subject)

The Beatles vs. Rolling Stones

Etc.

;)

1: they didnít. It is a hoax

2: maybe, but my luxman with lamp amplifier sound way better than any digital contraption.

3: the Bea... Who?



Logged

James Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1134
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #9 on: December 06, 2018, 02:55:00 pm »

Next on your to-do (discuss) list:

How awesome it is that man landed on the Moon

I canít believe some people still believe this actually happened. 
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 832
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #10 on: December 06, 2018, 03:13:06 pm »

Just to put my question straight, I don't advocate anything
I am in the forum to get my work criticized an look at what others do.
I never try to start arguments advocating this or that. I'm conscious of my weaknesses in photography.
I'd like the opinion of other people interested in photography, that's all. Like in a circle of knowledgeable friends who can help me in doing better something I like.
That's all

As for my prints, I softproof  my images and in the end they look so as nearly as it goes in print.
You may like them or not.
So if you see what I publish here and you have a more or less well tuned monitor, that's it (more or less :-)

My question was anyhow out of curiosity. Just to chat.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14363
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #11 on: December 06, 2018, 04:07:52 pm »

Relax, rabanito, I was just teasing you. In a friendly way, I hope :)

faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 945
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #12 on: December 06, 2018, 04:42:58 pm »

Why do you quote me on this? Iím not interested in the gear.
Sorry. I hit Quote instead of Reply. I did not intend to quote you.

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 832
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2018, 05:16:13 pm »

Relax, rabanito, I was just teasing you. In a friendly way, I hope :)

No problem, Slobodan. I have a wide sense of humor  :)

My Blitz and Donner weren't directed at you specifically  ;)
I ordered the book you proposed, BTW. If it's not good I'll send you the bill

Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21935
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #14 on: December 06, 2018, 05:57:21 pm »

I scanned recently some old negatives and worked on them in Ps.
I have the impression that those old things have lots of "body", of "substance", that I don't get with my digital camera
Of course I am inexperienced and maybe imagining things just because I don't master the techniques.
Any opinions?


Actually, you are probably right, which means that if you are, then so am I.

I feel very happy with what I can do in Photoshop, all the little tricks that turn nothing into a little bit of something, then I look at a simple print, heads of my two young kids together, that sits, framed, on the bedside table - a quick shot made on the end of a roll at the end of a commercial shoot, just before I unloaded the Hasselblad and took the stuff into the darkroom. A 10"x12" on double weight Kodak, grade 2, and even today, maybe forty-five years later, that print looks fabulous to me, the tonality - the feel of those tones, and it reduces my opinion about my digital stuff to crap. And no tricks out of a computer programmme; how dated! But how lovely. Hard to beat a good glaze!

Yes, film is different, and that shot was on Kodak's TXP 120, no fine-grain wonder, but overflowing with character on that format. Oddly, I never used it for 135 format; didn't like the look it gave on those smaller negatives.

Film had something best described as organic, which does not mean that I could look at images on the Internet and always know which was which, digital or film, just that for me, it worked beautifully, satisfied my eye, and that's what counted.

« Last Edit: December 07, 2018, 03:48:35 am by Rob C »
Logged

RBFritz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 126
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2018, 06:56:08 pm »

Well said ,Rob.
Logged

MMitchell

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #16 on: April 15, 2019, 09:31:32 pm »

I scanned recently some old negatives and worked on them in Ps.
I have the impression that those old things have lots of "body", of "substance", that I don't get with my digital camera
Of course I am inexperienced and maybe imagining things just because I don't master the techniques.
Any opinions?

I find b&w film photography more interesting if the negatives are printed on an enlarger and developed with chemicals, i.e. 100 pct. analog from camera to print.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21935
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #17 on: April 16, 2019, 03:39:23 pm »

I find b&w film photography more interesting if the negatives are printed on an enlarger and developed with chemicals, i.e. 100 pct. analog from camera to print.


But here's the thing: take street pictures as an excellent example of a huge difference between film and digital photography in my little scheme of things. I have admired great street for a long time, but would never dream of shooting it on film though I do try my hand at my own take on it now and then using digital. Why? Because I simply wouldn't print a street shot from either of the two mediums; that being so, why spend money on it? There's nothing about street that would make me think of hanging it on the wall of my pad. Yes, it certainly is a great genre for looking at between courses at solitary luncheons, but not for my wall. Now, were I to have an HC-B print of something of his that takes my fancy, that might be different, if only for historical reasons. But walls demand something that attracts the eye and adds positively to the room's ambience. Gilden & Co. wouldn't offer that at all. I'm prepared to accept that it could work quite well in some theme bar or restaurant, perhaps. And of course, in galleries and books.

Things you wouldn't spend money printing can still be very enjoyable viewed on screens of some sort. Perhaps that's something unique that digital has given us: an opportunity to make and enjoy types of imagery that have no other purpose but screen viewing. It doesn't imply some inferior status to such imagery at all, simply a different purpose and set of viewing values - those famous horses for courses.

Rob
« Last Edit: April 16, 2019, 03:58:19 pm by Rob C »
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12702
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #18 on: April 16, 2019, 04:46:43 pm »

I agree with everything you said, Rob, but you left out one kind of viewing: book viewing. I have a ton of books on street photography with stuff from film days: HCB, Kertesz, Chim, Doisneau, Ronis, BrassaÔ, Evans, Erwitt, Riboud, Winogrand, Levitt, Frank... I treasure the prints in those books, though they're a long way from wall-display quality. One of the nice things about street is that you don't need top-of-the line prints, because street isn't about wall prints, as you made clear.

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 832
Re: Digital vs Analog B&W
« Reply #19 on: April 16, 2019, 05:42:14 pm »

I agree with everything you said, Rob, but you left out one kind of viewing: book viewing. I have a ton of books on street photography with stuff from film days: HCB, Kertesz, Chim, Doisneau, Ronis, BrassaÔ, Evans, Erwitt, Riboud, Winogrand, Levitt, Frank... I treasure the prints in those books, though they're a long way from wall-display quality. One of the nice things about street is that you don't need top-of-the line prints, because street isn't about wall prints, as you made clear.

I'd say exactly the same
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up