But seriously folks, comparing cheap plastic Holgas to good digital cameras and then saying that film doesn’t look as good as digital, strikes me as a little weird. Granted, it’s not the camera that makes a good photographer but a master sculptor with dull chisels is not going to make the best sculpture he could, either.

As far as the cost, I bought a ’80’s Eos630 film camera from Ebay for $20 and got a cheap 19-35 Tamron lens for $100. I could buy and shoot film for a year and not even come close to the cost of a nice full-frame digital SLR that’s gonna be obsolete in two years or less (and then you have to buy another one). I get my film developed and scanned at Walgreens and it looks as good as any dslr.

I’m not a digital hater, I use digital. Digital has many advantages over film, image quality is NOT one of them. No digital camera, at any price, has the resolution and dynamic range as a slide film like Velvia, for example, right out of the box. Film is the original “raw.”

All in all, film is just another tool the photographer uses to catch the image. Good for somethings, not as good for others. Sorry for the windy rant. Just adding my two cents. exactly what my opinion is worth… if that much.

Crash

As for the general discussions, film has more of a nostalgic feel to it, and the reality shows it. Many people TALK about using film but most don’t bother, this is why Polaroid is closing down, and why most paper and chemical manufacturers are struggling.

That all changed with digital. As soon as I got my first digital camera, I was hooked. I now have a dSLR, and I’m loving it. Just ordered two new lenses!

I got a Holga thinking it would be fun to play with film now that I make more money than I used to. The same problems still exist, as far as I’m concerned. Fewer shots, and processing is still more expensive, comparatively. Experiments that don’t work out are more expensive than with digital.

When I process my digital stuff in PS I delete what didn’t work without a second thought: there’s enough there to concentrate on.

When I develop a few rolls of film and half of the shots look like hell, I just feel cheated by comparison. Now that I’m shooting RAW with my digital camera, the possibilities seem endless by comparison to film. I admit my recent experience is with a plastic camera, but I have *zero* desire to buy a cheap film dSLR off Craig’s List and experiment further.

Maybe after another 8 years experience I will feel differently, but… Digital is just more fun and accessible than film. If you’re blowing up your work to such a large size that the pixels are visible, then by all means go with film. I understand, however, that even some of the large format stuff is finally going digital. I would think shooting that kind of work would be cheaper with film. Fine.

I’m sure some old hands will disagree with me, but make mine digital!