Post by Chris Wolfe on Jan 18, 2005 17:56:42 GMT -5
Keep it Traditional
-article by Chris Wolfe
Editor-in-Chief
For over a century, the greatest photographers in the world have used the same exact medium—film. How can we deny the very thing that the greatest in the world have trusted for so many years, only to replace it with our new technology of today?
Digital technology cannot be trusted. With the constant release of new cameras and add-ons, you can spend thousands of dollars in a matter of only a year trying to update your camera to make it the most efficient. And then there is the added cost of developing your photos. If you pay 29¢ per photo, and you want double prints on 24 pictures, you will end up paying $14.83 (with tax) for your pictures, almost $7 more per set than developing film. If you were to develop 35 rolls of film per year, you will pay approximately $520 for developing fees, nearly $220 more than developing film. However, if you print photos at home on your general printer, you will spend even more. Paper for printing will cost you about $375 per year alone. And new ink cartridges, which will have to be replaced monthly, will cost around $40 per month, or $480 per year. Combined, you are spending $850 per year on your photofinishing, whereas you can save $550 by simply dropping off your photos at Walgreen’s.
By using film, you can add many more manual effects to help enhance your photos and shape them the way you want them. With digital cameras, the work is automatically done for you, and sometimes doesn’t come out the way you want it. After much frustration, you give up, and lose that perfect picture which you could have achieved if you had just used film. Film is ideal for customizing your pictures and achieving amazing effects that only film can give you.
One other reason why film is better than digital is the fact that you know that your pictures will always be safe. With digital, there is the risk of having your computer crash and having all of your photos disappear (I have personal experience of this), or you can lose you memory card which contained all of your important information. With film however, after being developed, the negatives are returned to you, so if you for some reason your picture is lost, you are able to reprint it with only a small cost to you.
It is obvious that film is the better choice here. Film is cheaper to deal with that the ever-increasing cost of digital media. Film can offer you more effects when taking a photo because the equipment is so much better than digital can ever offer. And with film, you always have that safe feeling of knowing that unless your house burns down, you will never be without your pictures, because reprints are cheap and easy. So when debating what kind of camera to buy the next time you’re at Best Buy, don’t overlook the original master-makers, the good ‘ol reliable film cameras.
E-mail this reporter at:
photoeditorcw@yahoo.com
The Camera of the Future
-article by Lauren Lipovic
Assistant Editor
After interviewing five people, the results seem clear to me, I think digital cameras are better much better than film cameras for various reasons. For one, you do not have to take the film to be developed or take the extra time to develop them yourself. Although digital cameras can be costly, the money may be saved in the end, due to developing expenditures. With a digital camera, the photographer has the opportunity to take more pictures at once and be satisfied with ever one of them. Digital cameras have memory cards, which the pictures are stored on and anyone can buy one of these cards with up to a sixty-picture memory! With a digital camera, the user can take the memory card out of the camera and slide it into the computer and save the pictures in a file. They can then choose to print out as many copies as they please. A fun vanity that digital cameras offer is saving a wild picture of friends or a vacation spot on your desktop to welcome you each day. The photographer also saves gas money needed to get to the camera shop to deliver the role of film and the returning trip to pick up the developed pictures.
Digital camera users also do not need to worry about losing the proofs, incase they want to print doubles a year or so later. Another option that all digital cameras have is that they can e-mail as many pictures as they like to friends and family members. With digital cameras, the user is able to view and delete any photo at any given time, without charge. This comes in handy, when trying to get that "perfect picture." Film cameras do not have this viewing vanity so the photographer really does not know what to expect when developing pictures. For instance, with the film cameras, photographers may find themselves receiving pictures ruined due to a glare form glass or technical difficulties that occurred during development. This would be a disappointment if you were taking a picture of the Mona Lisa, then when you return to the states and developed that role of film you get a letter of apology that the role did not turn out, instead of a unique photograph. I think that the pictures turn out much clearer, when taken with a digital camera, opposed to a film camera. As with a film camera, digital cameras also have zoom buttons and many others of the same and more advanced buttons as the former. Some digital cameras can also be used as tape recorders and that special moment can then be made into a movie when put to work on the computer. With all of these features and many more soon to come in the future to further enhance this camera, I think the digital camera is the popular camera of the future.
E-mail this reporter at:
photoassteditor@yahoo.com
-article by Chris Wolfe
Editor-in-Chief
For over a century, the greatest photographers in the world have used the same exact medium—film. How can we deny the very thing that the greatest in the world have trusted for so many years, only to replace it with our new technology of today?
Digital technology cannot be trusted. With the constant release of new cameras and add-ons, you can spend thousands of dollars in a matter of only a year trying to update your camera to make it the most efficient. And then there is the added cost of developing your photos. If you pay 29¢ per photo, and you want double prints on 24 pictures, you will end up paying $14.83 (with tax) for your pictures, almost $7 more per set than developing film. If you were to develop 35 rolls of film per year, you will pay approximately $520 for developing fees, nearly $220 more than developing film. However, if you print photos at home on your general printer, you will spend even more. Paper for printing will cost you about $375 per year alone. And new ink cartridges, which will have to be replaced monthly, will cost around $40 per month, or $480 per year. Combined, you are spending $850 per year on your photofinishing, whereas you can save $550 by simply dropping off your photos at Walgreen’s.
By using film, you can add many more manual effects to help enhance your photos and shape them the way you want them. With digital cameras, the work is automatically done for you, and sometimes doesn’t come out the way you want it. After much frustration, you give up, and lose that perfect picture which you could have achieved if you had just used film. Film is ideal for customizing your pictures and achieving amazing effects that only film can give you.
One other reason why film is better than digital is the fact that you know that your pictures will always be safe. With digital, there is the risk of having your computer crash and having all of your photos disappear (I have personal experience of this), or you can lose you memory card which contained all of your important information. With film however, after being developed, the negatives are returned to you, so if you for some reason your picture is lost, you are able to reprint it with only a small cost to you.
It is obvious that film is the better choice here. Film is cheaper to deal with that the ever-increasing cost of digital media. Film can offer you more effects when taking a photo because the equipment is so much better than digital can ever offer. And with film, you always have that safe feeling of knowing that unless your house burns down, you will never be without your pictures, because reprints are cheap and easy. So when debating what kind of camera to buy the next time you’re at Best Buy, don’t overlook the original master-makers, the good ‘ol reliable film cameras.
E-mail this reporter at:
photoeditorcw@yahoo.com
The Camera of the Future
-article by Lauren Lipovic
Assistant Editor
After interviewing five people, the results seem clear to me, I think digital cameras are better much better than film cameras for various reasons. For one, you do not have to take the film to be developed or take the extra time to develop them yourself. Although digital cameras can be costly, the money may be saved in the end, due to developing expenditures. With a digital camera, the photographer has the opportunity to take more pictures at once and be satisfied with ever one of them. Digital cameras have memory cards, which the pictures are stored on and anyone can buy one of these cards with up to a sixty-picture memory! With a digital camera, the user can take the memory card out of the camera and slide it into the computer and save the pictures in a file. They can then choose to print out as many copies as they please. A fun vanity that digital cameras offer is saving a wild picture of friends or a vacation spot on your desktop to welcome you each day. The photographer also saves gas money needed to get to the camera shop to deliver the role of film and the returning trip to pick up the developed pictures.
Digital camera users also do not need to worry about losing the proofs, incase they want to print doubles a year or so later. Another option that all digital cameras have is that they can e-mail as many pictures as they like to friends and family members. With digital cameras, the user is able to view and delete any photo at any given time, without charge. This comes in handy, when trying to get that "perfect picture." Film cameras do not have this viewing vanity so the photographer really does not know what to expect when developing pictures. For instance, with the film cameras, photographers may find themselves receiving pictures ruined due to a glare form glass or technical difficulties that occurred during development. This would be a disappointment if you were taking a picture of the Mona Lisa, then when you return to the states and developed that role of film you get a letter of apology that the role did not turn out, instead of a unique photograph. I think that the pictures turn out much clearer, when taken with a digital camera, opposed to a film camera. As with a film camera, digital cameras also have zoom buttons and many others of the same and more advanced buttons as the former. Some digital cameras can also be used as tape recorders and that special moment can then be made into a movie when put to work on the computer. With all of these features and many more soon to come in the future to further enhance this camera, I think the digital camera is the popular camera of the future.
E-mail this reporter at:
photoassteditor@yahoo.com