Film Photography vs Digital Photography Animal Experimentation School Uniform
I thought of doing abortion but I think that topic is over used and I'm sure my teacher will have read it so many times.
What do you think of my main choices? I would prefer the photography one, is that a good one to do? Or should I do something else? Do you have any suggestions and tips? Thank you.
Personally, I'd go for the animal testing topic. Photography is an interesting subject - for people who are interested in photography. But for the rest of the world, it's a pretty dry subject - all technical, no real ethical question there.
The subject of animal experimentation, however, is something most people have an opinion on, and there are compelling arguments for andagainst. Up to you, but I think that's the sort of topic that fills the pages, you know? I know if it were me, I'd have an easier time whipping out a paper on something that gets both sides fired up as opposed to a question for tech geeks. But that's me - and that's what I would rather read about, too. Although your teacher is supposed to be impartial, I think you might fare better with a more "hot button" topic than which camera is better.
Just an opinion - you do what you think is best. Hope you get a good grade.
Santa Vs. Santa (short film) - Shay Carl, wheezywaiter, and Corey Vidal (Christmas 2010)
digital photography vs film5 digital photography vs film5
Digital Photography Vs. Film Photography: The Great Debate
Ever since the introduction of the digital camera, a war has raged within the photography community. There are those that would claim 35mm film is the one true “professional” media, and digital its casual, amateur counterpart. Conversely, as costs decrease and quality increases, there is an ever-expanding group of working photographers that shoot and produce only in digital. So what is a consumer to think? Is 35mm still the way to go, or is it time to trade up for a new digital model? It’s time to break each format down and seal this deal, once and for all. Digital: Amateur? It is true that there are many digital cameras on the market, and like their 35mm counterparts there is an endless supply of variables that can impact the images each one is capable of producing. Image quality (in terms of color contrast and depth of field) have always been a major concern for those taking digital images and is still one of the common excuses heard from the opposition. Add to this the fact that finding a digital camera that could match the sheer raw data contained in a photograph on film was both arduous and incredibly expensive, and the 35mm enthusiast has a fairly solid argument.
Fortunately for the consumer, the price of an high quality digital camera has dropped sharply in the last few years. Canon's popular "Digital Rebel" line of SLRS (single lens reflexes) have given people an affordable entry level camera with near professional results for under $1,000. And since Canon isn’t the only camera company in the world, it’s a safe bet consumers can look forward to even better cameras at even lower prices as manufacturers double their efforts to be first in line at the retail counter.
35mm: Antiquated? In these modern times, why even use film at all? It’s certainly no secret that film has an unforgiving and often expensive learning curve, and recent trends show professionals leaning heavily on digital for precisely those reasons. After all, when taking pictures at an event like a Super Bowl, would it better to have the potential for thousands of pictures, or just the film you have with you? Sports photographers answered that question by taking over 10,000 digital images in a single Super Bowl game.
However, just as some music enthusiasts claim that everything sounds better on a record, there are plenty of photographers who agree that there is no matching the warmth and familiarity of a fresh roll of film. In fact, developing film manually and printing photos in a darkroom is for some one of the most rewarding photographic experiences a photographer can have. Sure, photos can be powerfully edited using tools like Adobe Photoshop to remove almost any imperfection, but clicking a mouse is very different than the tactile sensations of a darkroom. And of course, having someone else print up a roll of film can take as little as an hour.
And the Winner is… Neither! Based on the availability of technology and the vast resources devoted to this topic, there's really no single point that wins this battle. As with many debates, the winner here is going to be entirely up to the needs and desires of the individual. Families wanting to shoot and share their holiday memories on the fly may choose digital due to its instant gratification and convenience, while others may stick to good old film so they can print up doubles and put them into family photo albums. Thanks to powerful yet affordable innovations in digital and the classic, "do it yourself familiarity of film" the choice is now directly in the hands of the consumer- right where it belongs.
About the Author
Autumn Lockwood is a writer for Your Picture Frames.com and loves photography. Your Picture Frames makes it easy for you to find just the right frame for your photo or artwork. Visit our online frame store and see our selection of oval photo frames and square frames now.
Is film photography dead? Never!
digital photography vs film photography5 digital photography vs film photography5 digital photography vs film photography5
Photography - Understanding Film Vs Digital Cameras
Emulsion film, as a medium for capturing photographic images, has been around in one form or another for more than 150 years. But due to the rapidly growing popularity of digital cameras, newcomers to photography are sometimes surprised to discover that film is still being manufactured and sold for all-purpose photography. Once their first digital camera is in hand, and they have mastered the art of recording images electronically, and storing them as files, the idea of using film seems a strange concept indeed.
So why is film still being used by some photographers?
To understand the answer to this, we will need to take a look at the differences between film stock and the modern image sensors that make digital cameras possible.
Let's start with the newer technology: the light sensitive electronic surface that sits at the center of a digital camera, and which is known as an image sensor. Basically these sensors are a specialized form of microchip. But they do not carry out any computations. Instead, all they do is measure the amount of light that falls on different parts of the sensor surface in a given time window. If you were to zoom in on one of these thumbnail-sized chips, blowing it up to the size of a football stadium, you would see that the surface of the sensor looked a lot like your tiled kitchen floor.
Each one of those square tiles represents a separate photodiode, capable of measuring just the amount of light that falls on it. In fact, sitting just above each photodiode is a colored filter. The filter is there to block all but the wavelength of light that it sends on to the photodiode. These filters come in red, green, and blue, so that any given photodiode will be measuring only the intensity of light for the particular color of the filter sitting above it.
Imagine for the moment that every tile on that kitchen floor is green. Now take one row of tiles and color every second tile blue. For the next row of tiles, color every second tile red, but shift the red tiles across by one space so that the red tiles appear beneath the green tiles of the previous row. Then repeat the process with blue tiles on the next row, and so on, until the entire floor is covered with these alternate rows of green/blue and green/red tiles. This is just what the surface of the image sensor looks like when seen close up.
In point of fact, this particular arrangement of colored filters, with twice as many green pixels as either red or blue, is known as a Bayer array. It is the most commonly used color filtering method employed in digital cameras, but it is by no means the only one used. Because the human eye is more sensitive to green light than red or blue, the green-favoring of the Bayer system actually works to its advantage when the colors are finally combined to produce printable images.
Every time a digital camera is used to record an image, this mosaic of colored tiles captures the various intensities of red, green, and blue light. So every photodiode, or "electronic pixel", has associated with it a color and a number. If a perfectly green lime was being photographed, the red and blue pixels would have the number zero associated with them, while the green pixels around them would carry non-zero numbers. In reality, small contributions of red and blue light would be mixed with much stronger green contributions to produce the hues of green that color the skin of the lime.
All of this information is whisked away from the image sensor and stored in a temporary image buffer, later to be transferred to the memory card used by digital cameras to store images as files. Software is then used to manipulate the images (or not) before they are finally sent to a photo printer.
The resolution of the images is determined by the number of photodiodes (pixels) that can be crammed onto the surface of an image sensor. These days it is not uncommon to find about 4000 pixels along one edge of the sensor, and 2500 along the other. The product of these numbers is 10 million, or 10 megapixels in the digital camera parlance.
So, how does this compare with film resolution?
Well, these days the brand of film stock recognized as offering the finest resolution is Fuji's Velvia 50 RVP. While it is not possible to ascribe a grain size to the emulsion that is used in slide film (there are a number of different sized grains in the dyes that make up the emulsion) an effective number of pixels per inch can be assigned to film stock based on how many closely-spaced "thin lines" can be resolved in the laboratory. The effective PPI, or pixels per inch, for Velvia is about 4000. This translates, assuming a 35mm frame size, to about 22 megapixels of image resolution. For better known film brands, like Kodachrome, the number is closer to 9 megapixels.
Clearly, with current top-end digital SLR models offering resolutions that surpass 20 megapixels, the numerical advantage that film once offered in terms of image resolution has all but vanished. Digital cameras now match the image resolution of even the very best film stocks, and will surpass them as image sensor technology continues to improve.
So now we are back to our still-answered question: why is film stock still produced when digital imagery is on a par with it, at least in terms of resolution?
The answer is that resolution is by no means the full story when it comes to creating a great image. As mentioned, emulsions contain a range of grain sizes and dye components that work together to produce effects that cannot easily be reproduced with three sets of red, green, and blue numbers. Velvia, for instance, adds more warmth to the actual recorded colors, and produces landscape images that look better than the real thing.
Fortunately for us, the makers of film stock, and the makers of digital cameras, are not, by and large, the same people. Otherwise film stock might disappear a lot more quickly from the world of photography. That probably will not happen for a while though. Not as long as film stock can produce images that surpass the quality of digital methods. Until that is no longer the case, photographic film will have a place in the world of photography.
To help you select a suitable digital camera to get started with, I have put together an article for you about how to find the right Beginner Digital Camera.
Whether you need a simple point-and-shoot model, or a more complex digital SLR model, you will find the answers, and greatly discounted digital camera offers, at http://www.bestdigitalcameradiscounts.com/
Hey, im going to be getting an SLR pretty soon and was thinking what are the best options for a first time buyer. I am Studying photography in the very near future, and have done work in 2 school years with Film SLR Cameras (Nikon) I love Nikon Cameras, but seen really good quality Canon's aswell.
What would you suggest me buying? Canon vs Nikon...? Thanks =]
Canon and Nikon are the top two in Dslr manufacture. Their cameras are both excellent and they both have their good and bad points. They both have good service, ranges of accessories and are similar in price points.
Asking your question all you will get is the fanboys giving their Nikon or Canon is best posts.
Get your options down to 2 or so of each and then go along and handle and play with each. The one which has the facilities you want, which you feel comfortable with and is in your price range is the one to buy.
Metering with your digital camera - Incident vs Reflected
digital photography vs film photography5 digital photography vs film photography5
