Film vs. Digital which is better for your doll photos?

100% digital. n n! I don't have access to a darkroom any longer, so I really have no choice -- lest I want to PAY to have someone develop my film. Which I don't like to do.

Er, well, and I used polaroid, too, but those shots are just for me. They will never leave my bedroom. 9 9 (I sound like some sort of kidnapper.)

 

I say digital. Most people nowadays are switching to digital for the convience. It's also cheaper too, than having to buy film and get it processed. Then film takes up more time as you would still have to scan it if you wanted to post pics online.

Also, you can correct your pictures with image editing programs, unlike with film...what you shoot is what you get (if you exposed it right). Sure you can correct the images if you scan it but that just takes up too much of my time.

I still have my 35mm SLR tho I haven't used it now for 3 years. I still love the process of developing film but it's too much of a hassle now to get my pics online using it.

 

Digital, absolutely. I'm not a skilled photographer and I make many mistakes. The shot is blurry, the angle is unflattering, the color is weird, etc, etc. Using a digital camera I can spot the problems immediately and re-take the picture. I'll try various combinations of white balance, exposure, and flash, changing the angle slightly. Usually I have to take around 20 to 30 pictures to get one that's decent enough that it won't be a complete embarrassment to post publicly. And even then it's not very good. (LOL) If I only had a film camera I probably wouldn't ever take any doll photos because it would just be a bunch of really expensive and really ugly pictures.

 

I'm no star photographer by any means, but I prefer both. I like digital because it's easier and faster, since I just plug 'em into my computer and poof! -- they're ready to be used. But I have this great old 35mm SLR that I'm in love with, and having that control over the camera and taking pictures the non-digital way is kinda fun. Especially since a lot of places can give you a photo CD or at least a photo floppy disk so you don't have to scan them.

My problem is I can never get myself to a Rite-Aid or something to get them developed, and I dislike paying the money for it because I'm a tightwad. I like instant acess to my photos. In that respect, digital is a lot more practical.

 

I prefer digital because I can edit or tweak my photos. With film I take a lot of really bad photos. :P

 

i also prefer digital. i dont even own a camera that takes film. its just easier and quicker to take pictures with my digital and easier to correct them.

 

Film.

 

Mid range to higher end digital cameras/photos are just as good as film. Plus there is the added benefit of being able to view your picture immediately (on screen review) and delete anything not up to your standards. With regular film it's at least a day before you know how the photo has come out, and if it's bad, it's bad. You're stuck with it - and having paid to process and maybe even print it.

 

The 35mm SLR will most definately be better then the digital, IMHO. I have a Kodak 3.2 Easyshare, and an old Cannon SLR that my father is having me hold onto while he has fun with his digital SLR, and I absolutely LOVE having the different lenses and manual functionality of the 35mm camera.
Yes, you have to wait until you fill a roll of film to develop, and there will always be spots for errors, but I've been learning better that way.

The pictures on my digital camera don't even START to compare.

Now, though, I know there are some great digital cameras out there. I'm pining for a digital SLR of my own someday...but if you're trying to figure out which to take pictures with the cameras you have in your posession right now, I'd totally tell you to take the 35mm.

I usually reserve my digital for quick sales pictures or last minute pictures. And a bit more lately, since I'm really needing some more film. XD

 

Well, the fact that you can use different lenses to get a better closeup shot on the 35mm is going to be better. The only con I see to using the 35mm is having to scan the image which takes more time.

 

That's good then! Definitely use the SLR, you'll learn more about photography that way than with the SLR.

 

I prefer 'real' film. I like to carry my pics- hard copies and the quality is wonderful. That said it is spendy! The best advantages for my digital are that the pics-after initial outlay- are freee. I can take dozens (or in my case hundreds) and manipulate them- play with the colors the edges etc etc etc. Also wonderful to share .
But at some point I will get another 'real' camera for the hard copies and won't that be fun!
QZ

 

No problem at all. ^_^ It's easier since you like to post questions I kinda know the answers to. XD I get to feel smart for a change.

Really, it takes some getting used to. The first three rolls(and some really good shots) were totally wasted when I tried it for the first time because I didn't realize my shutterspeed was stuck on a setting that left the shutter open as long as my finger was on the button, so needless to say, they were all blurry and overexposed. I'm just lucky I have my dad to help me out and let me know what does what, and I'm really learning alot with my photography. And now that I'm getting the hang of it, it's been really hard for me to take a bad photo! Everything comes out so beautifully!

A good investment into it would be a tripod, though. If you try to get extreme close-ups(I've tried to get bugs XD), the tiny movements of your hands will be picked up. Also, if you take your normal lense(my dad calls it something...I can't remember off the top of my head. I just know it's the lense I use to take regular pictures with...nothing special. XD), and flip it facing your camera(apparently some lenses will screw in both ways), it makes a macro lense!

But yeah. My best advice to give with it is just take it out, ask your father about what he knows about it(as it was his camera. He might know some of it's functions), and just take pictures! I invested in the five packs of Fujifilm at Walmart, and it lasted me a long time, even with messing up three rolls. CVS(or at least my CVS) does wonderful prints, and you can always get pictures put on a CD if you don't want to scan them(personally, scanning is no problem for me...need to clean my scanner, though...real bad. XD).

And if you learn to use the SLR and use it well, chances are there won't be a camera out there that you won't be able to use.

 

teehee- yeah my Gma same same- I end up making collages and printing them out for her or just printing pics and making her albums. On the other hand hardly anyone else takes pics anymore so at least they are being taken right?
Oh yeah I'd do mostly film with dig for back up and previews
QZ

 

Well collages are fun for all kinds of things I did some from the last meet too- gets lots of info into less space- this is just an overview- but you get the idea.

Collages of the dolls is WAY fun too. My profile page has a small collage pic of some of our dolls too-

I have shaky hands and arms- thought I was knocked out of my identity (arm/hand injuries are killer for an artist!) but you know - digital photography brought me back Ever ever grateful!

Well congrats whatever you decide!

QZ

 

Hi. This is rather belated, but I think whether the 35mm camera is better or not depends on the lens your father has. For example, some lenses (like the one I first bought) can not do good close-ups, and while wide angle is so much fun, the distortion it causes require careful composition. But that said, I agree learning to handle 35mm really is a great idea. Though I use digital single reflex camera most of the time now due to the high running cost of film, my old manual cameras (35mm single reflex (I think this is what you are talking about), twin reflex, and rangefinder) often bring more joy. The fact those film based photo cannot be tweaked/retaken like digital also force me to be more careful. So practicing with them once in a while brings up my hitting rate.

 

Close-up lenses are actually pretty cheap and can be bought at Wolf Camera. I usually use a +1 or +2 to get the face shots of my girls.
And then, there's the flipping the lense over and making a Macro lense that way ^_^

 

Hi Niteshadepromise. Not that I want to disagree but I thought not all lenses could do the reverse mounting (e.g. my oldest Pentax combination certainly cannot). And aren't +1 & +2 thing you are talking about more of the close-up filters/attachment to the lenses? Just wondering...

But true, with those close-up filters etc. the working distance/the range of expression really expands for any cameras

 

I don't think you need a macro lens to shoot bjds unless you're wanting to focus in on some extreme detail on a particular item or part.

Also, some digital cameras do have adapters that can be purchased to use with closeup lenses.

 

Actually...heh, my own lense that I do this trick with doesn't reverse mount. I hold it there as best I can, which can be very difficult, but it's not impossible. ^_^ It works until I can actually go true macro...and possibly digital SLR.
And yes, they're lense attachments. As nikita said, if they don't fit on your lense, you can find adapters(can't remember what my dad called them off the top of my head) that can get them to fit, digital or not.
I have a +1, a +2, and a +4, and all of them can even be combined to get even more close...buuuut, usually for doll photos, a +1 or a +2 will suffice. A tripod makes these lenses much easier to come out with a clear image.

I tend to abandon technical photo-speak(I'm a drawing artist...not much of a photographer outside of taking pics of my girls..and flowers. XD), so most of the time, I call both my filters and lenses...well...lenses.
Sorry if I confused!

 

Hi. Sorry I got a bit carried away. And don't worry about camera being old, because old manual cameras often keep working much longer than digital/automatic cameras. I mean, some of mine are over 50 years old, and show no sign of breaking down.
My gripes regarding old cameras are rather about their weight/bulk and great versatility coming at the cost of multiple parts (like separate lenses, angle finders, fancy filters, etc.). Just imagine carrying around the dolls & the camera gear (of which pretty much none does something automatically for you)... I can easily see why 35mm SLR are not for everybody.
But with all that said, I still say just give it a try. It is the quickest and the most fun way to learn how to take better pictures. My only warning is to be careful not to get addicted to photography on top of BJD!

 

35mm!

I still miss my old manual camera so much sometimes. The only reason why I'm on digicam is that I take -way- too many pictures that using film is almost ridiculous =_=

quality wise, manual cameras all the way, unless you have enough money to spend on those 2k-ish digicams

 

If there's one argument against 35mm SLR ... it's time. Time and money. If there are TWO arguments ...

OK. Time. It takes time to have a film developed, and you have to wait until a roll is finished. Plus, you then have to go back and pick up your pics, and then realise that you just shot 36 frames with the macro switch off. Or overexposed. Or something, and three days later, the moment has been lost.

Money is obvious - it costs to shoot film.

For the time element alone, I would recommend a Digital over Film camera - plus the abilitiy to Photoshop from original source, rather than a scan. If you want a decent digital, consider buying a secondhand one rather than a new one. A halfway decent DSLR could be yours for $300 off eBay.

 

i lost my digital so i'll be taking pics of Sadako with film for a while...anything i should be doing differently???

i don't even know what camera it is since i haven't used it in so long!!!!!

 

I would recommend that you get your prints back digitally so that you won't have to mess about with scanning.

 

The only difference for me really is that I have to prepare for the shot more. As Zagzagael said most places now offer a photo cd that you can buy for like 2-5 dollars extra when you take your film in to be developed. I've never had one made so I can't vouch for the quality but its inexpensive enough to be worth a try.

the only tips I can give you to make the most out of a film camera is make sure you have PLENTY of light and stay away from artificial light. Cameras don't see the same thing we do, sadly it may take you a few sets to adjust to what you think is enough light. With a film camera pictures are more of a gamble since you don't know what you're getting.

 

i do photography as a hobby and i used to work w/film...but it's been years and i've never shot a BJD before...i have taken pics of bears and my American Girl...and flowers...but i do believe my film camera has a close up feature...

i do find i'm having difficulty focusing because i have hand tremors...and i like the digital review that way i know if i need to take another picture...

the situation just sucks.

but i have Photoshop so editing is easy!

 

recommendations, Sometimes I pick up my old X-700 for fun. and here are things i would think about when I shoot in film again.

If you can use a manual mode to adjust your exposure, be sure to familiarize yourself with the camera's meter if it has one.

I agree with above, and would stay away from flash photography. artificial light that's coming from a constant source you can see if ok with me. that way you can adjust the exposure to match it without having "guess work" with how the film will react to your flash setting.

 

Oh yeah, I forgot to add...

Tripods, monopods or anything that can hold the camera still for you: if it's a short lens, I would put the camera on something to hold it still for you if you have to use a shutter speed slower than 1/30. if you're using a longer zoom the anything under 60 i would put on something to hold your camera for you. nothing sucks more than paying for film that has well exposed frames ruined by camera shake.
and keep a good close eye on your focus before releasing the shutter.

it's pretty much the same as shooting in film. but because of cost... I would be extra cautious when shooting film just so you really get your money's worth out of each roll.

hope this was helpful

 

i tried today...i didn't have much light and i didn't use flash...but i've edited dark photos before so i'm not so concerned...i will need to get a new camera though because film is so expensive!!!!!! I will get a tripod with the next one though because i have tremors and holding my camera is getting tough But today i think i did all right!!!!

 

i've officially declared my camera lost and am getting one with anti-blur loool

 

For little images of recent costumes, I like digital because it's quick. But for doll meets I like my Pentax. The pictures come out looking more personal and less graphic-like.

 

i guess i'm weird buti like both although i prefer film ^^; something about developing film just makes me happy XD plus i'm going into photography as a career XD

 

I use digital because it's more convenient for me. Using film doesn't allow me to preview the shots I took and I won't know how they really look like until after I develop it.

 

I'd say digital. I do occasionally dabble in dark room photography... but it's a lot of work. Generally digital is a lot easier to take, edit, share etc. So I voted digital, even though I love traditional photography to bits.

 

I like film better, but that's probably because my digital camera is a point-and-shoot with which I have been waging war. I actually find it much easier to hold a huge camera steady than a small light one. And my SLR is so old it doesn't think it's smarter than me.

I also love the surprise when I get the developed film back.

 

I prefer digital, so much easier. ^.^

 

Even my pictures taken with a digital camera suck, imagine ones I had to develop and even pay for it!!

I can't delete those ;_;

 

Honestly, I only like digital for the fact that it doesn't use film because I am camera trigger-happy.

but I seriously want to bite my digicam cos it's so hard to get colours to look right! Especially PURPLE! D<

Plus, digicams don't use light to take pictures, so depending on the situation, the image in the cam isn't always the image in real life =w= *petpeeve*

 

I like the convenience of digital and the instant gratification of being able to look at my pics straight away, but I love the excitement and anticipation that comes with waiting for my film prints and having a laugh when I flip through tangible copies at the candid pics I often end up with. (Think Magpie stealing a wig!!)

 

So far I have only used a digital camera for my dollypictures. This is because I put the pictures up on the net, and it is more convenient that way.

If I decide to use my dolls for an photo-art-project I might use a film based camera, but that depends on the kind of style I am after, so for the time being, it is only digital.

 

OI prefer digital photos to film. I went entirely digital a few years ago.

It's faster to see results and retake photos if you have to. also you can digitally retouch much better than using a scanned film picture.

Also you can always have the digital photo made into a print. I also have the advantage of having both a digital point and shoot and a digital slr.

The point and shoot is nice for meetups and the digital slr is great for artsy shots . I have better control on focusing. In the end digital comes out cheaper because I can take over 50 shoots in one shoot easily. Imagine how much

 

Definately Digital; you can view your pictures right away and in the long run, its cheaper and more convient

 

Digital is so much easier and cheaper. I still do film sometimes but it just so expensive. Also it's hard to find a good place to get your film processed (especially B&W). I've had my film scratched and lost by places. Doing it yourself is fun but it take so much time although the result can be great. Recently my aunt had party, so my bro and me were ask to cover it shot a combined 500 pictures. I hate to think how much that would cost with film. That reminds me with events like these it so nice to be able to switch lens and ISO. Which can be done in film but it really hard and risky. Also for posting you need a good film scanner and it's a pain.

 

Ive not got my doll, but i'd have to say digital all the way, im crap at loading 35mm film and dont have a clue about developing film so i'll be nicking my boyfriends camara as soon as my bjd arrives.

 

I did both because I have mixed results. I would prefer digital since I can control the picture a LOT better and get rid of any shot I don't like. But because I am limited by disposable cameras at the moment (something I hate, but as I don't work I can't go out and get one just yet), I have found that disposable cameras work beautifully when dealing with shade or natural light photos. Granted I can't get as close as I would like, but still I have some nice ones.

 

I'm all digital person. I cantt even imagine how could I use a film in the past.
It's faster, better quality, you can photoshop these pictures better, no need for a scanner and in the end it comes much cheaper than a film.

 

i prefer digtal cameras over the film ones, because... i m a terrible camera girl... sometimes my pictures are blurry or just doesn t look right... and it s a waste of film for me at least especially the really bad shots.

with a digtal camera i can erase the bad shots after taking them... and i can plug them into the computer and fix them with photoshop and enhance the pictures too... so yeah! definitely digtal camera for me

 

Digital only now. It's much more convenient for sharing plus, like everyone else said, you can tweak your photos.

 

I prefer digital, but I occasionaly use film for special things or if I need some artsy stuff. XD This applies to other things than dolls too.

Both have their advantages, but digital is more obvious since it's more convenient and a faster way to put up your pictures.