Film vs. Digital

Although digital photography has seen some serious growth over the years, some people still insist that film is the best way to go. I am certainly not among them. I strongly prefer digital cameras, and I know why.
I’m not denying that film cameras have some advantages over digital. It just seems to me that only professional photographers will overlook the advantages of digital. Even then, some professionals are better off with digital.

Professionals may set up what they view as the perfect shot and wait for the perfect moment to get that shot. I am far from professional. I would rather get several good shots than spend too much time trying for the perfect shot. I’m among those who believe that if you take a million pictures, one or two have to turn out. This is the biggest reason that I avoid film.

Film is lousy for those who take far more pictures than they need. Memory cards are more affordable than the rolls of film for the same number of pictures. They are also reusable. Not only that, but I don’t have to change film when a situation requires it or after 24-36 shots. Changing film could lead me to miss a shot while fumbling around with the film, and it would be a pain to have to carry that much film for some of my shooting sprees.

There’s also a psychological factor that comes from the points that I made above. The number of pictures that I can take with a digital camera allows me to take pictures without any concerns for quality. If I used film, I would more likely conserve my shots. Some of my best pictures would not have been taken if I had to worry about running out of film and had to pay for each individual exposure.

Another reason that I went digital is because I prefer soft copies of pictures. I can link to them from my blog and send them electronically to anyone who wants copies. I have printed out a few, but the total printed is insignificant in comparison to the pictures that I have actually taken. I have taken thousands of pictures. I have no intentions of keeping a hard form of every single one.

Since I prefer soft copy, another advantage of digital has become obvious. Film has to be converted to an image and then scanned in order to generate soft copies of images. While the hard copy may look good from film, it seems that the transition to soft copy would provide lower quality images than using a camera that records the image digitally in the first place.

I would recommend that amateurs buy digital. Image quality for digital pictures is fairly high right now and it is improving. Printing out a digital picture is more desirable than scanning in a print. Digital copies can be edited, shared, and backed up while taking up little physical space. You can tag and arrange pictures to make them easier to find instead of having to go through numerous albums to find the single picture that you want.

Keep in mind that I started this hobby as a way to document what I have seen. If I try too hard to get the right shot, I am going to miss numerous subjects. Since digital pictures are easier to justify taking, I get more shots and more subjects.

Of course, the biggest advantage of digital is that you don’t have to be good to take good pictures. You can easily snap off several pictures of a subject without worrying about running out of film. There may be little difference between these pictures, but you have more options when selecting your favorite pictures. Occasionally, you will take a good picture by accident. Maybe a bird will fly in the frame. Maybe a scene doesn’t seem nearly as impressive in person. Maybe you simply didn’t see something that was in the shot. Regardless, film photography is more demanding in terms of skill. If you want good pictures on film, you have to know what you’re doing. Obviously, I don’t.