-
11
Nov
Only a few years ago, digital cameras weren’t seen as the solution for every possible picture taking situation. Indeed, there were a few select fields of endeavor for which digital cameras seemed ideal and particularly cost-effective (which was a major consideration when a digital SLR cost $10,000 to $30,000). This section outlines the pioneering uses of digital photography and shows how digital cameras have come to predominate them.
Bye Bye Film?
A year ago I never dreamed I’d be seriously questioning the continued viability of film. After all, film cameras were much more inexpensive than digital cameras, and usually produced better results. Today, in the age of $300 6MP cameras and $600 dSLRs, neither of those rationales is still true. The reasons for sticking with film grow fewer in number every day.
Most motion pictures today are still shot on color negative film, but more and more are shot digitally for the gritty look and feel possible with digital video. Sometimes digital origination is obvious from the film itself, but other times you may enjoy an entire motion picture and not realize that it was not shot on film. For example, were you aware that Star Wars: Episode II: Attack of the Clones was an all-video production?
In these days of $100 million film budgets, the price of film is not a significant part of the cost, and on-set video systems allow reviewing shots even if they were originated on film. Moreover, it’s common to transfer film to digital format for editing. So, the special look of film will continue to be valued for motion pictures for some time yet, with digital cinematography favored for the most effects-heavy productions.
While sales of digital cameras finally surpassed those of film cameras, many still photographs are still produced using negatives or transparencies exposed in a camera. The advantages and disadvantages of electronic image capture versus film will change over the next few years, but, until we have $40 digital cameras, the pros of film cameras will outweigh the cons for many film applications for quite a while.
There are artistic reasons for retaining film capabilities, too, as anyone who shoots a lot of black and white film will testify. However, you can’t ignore the leanings of the grandfather of all film companies, Eastman Kodak Company, which announced late in 2003 that it was redirecting its business model from conventional film to digital imaging. If Kodak says film is (slowly) being phased out, and has discontinued its Advanced Photo System (APS) camera line, who are we to argue? Ilford is in financial trouble, and Agfa has announced that it’s getting out of the film business. This does not bode well for film-based photography.
