 BetterPhoto Member |
digital Vs. Chemical I own a digital and a regular camera, I was preparing to get a whole digital set up. printer adobe photoshop a scanner and so on. however I was looking into a darkroom set up. quality wise what makes a better and longer lasting photo.
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
Digital proponents will say digital [and argue whether dye-sublimation printers are better than inkjets.] Traditionalists will say darkroom prints can't be beat. If you're worried, at all, about health or environmental effects, you might want to stay away from color chemistry. There's no problem with B&W. Everyone's estimate of longevity of a digital print is based on a test [simulation.] There's NOTHING to prove the hypotheses; the jury's still out. But, there are lots of prints out there that demonstrate wet darkroom products last for many, many years! I won't enter my inkjet prints [scanned from print or negative/slide and printed on my photo printer]in any reputable photo competition. These can't hold a candle to professionally- made, darkroom prints, whether from print or slide. [Sorry, I don't own a digital camera so I can't do that discussion.]
|
|
|
|
||
|
Melissa L. Zavadil |
Just because you have a digital camera does not mean you are limited to an inkjet printer. Most quality photographs that are made with a digital are not printed with their 'home' inkjets they are going to professional labs that 'burn' the image.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Diane Dupuis |
Wow - once I tried digital there was no going back for me!! Paying for film? Having to go buy it? Having the wrong film in the camera for the situation? You can get the same prints from professional print labs as you do from film. You can shoot till your hearts content and then print only the best shots... No question in my mind! Digital wins hands down!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Karma Wilson |
Digital is the only way I will ever go. I have loved digital photography since I started. I can't say it's cost effective as the cameras and equipment I've bought would pay for an awful lot of film/processing. I suppose it could be cost effective, but just like computers the equipment gets outdated quickly--and I can't resist upgrades! I do know that I take far more pictures now than I ever did with film because I find myself so in control of every aspect of the process. I find digital so liberating. I can change my film speed with the flip of a button. I can make the most multiple of multiple exposures in PSE. Being creative I love working my photos in PS to bring out new themes from them. So digital to me is just fascinating and wonderful. And my camera is basically capable of film quality. As mentioned there are film developers who burn the print on professional photo paper that is archival. If I were you I would go digital simply because that's the way things are swinging. I remember when everybody scoffed at the idea of a personal computer or cell phones--and yet look at it now. Learn the technology and embrace it. There's nothing to fear! Karma
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||