Film Vs Digital Photography

1

Canon A-1 vs Canon AE-1 & making artistic images?

So basically i'm new to traditional SLR photography. My friend owns a Canon AE-1 and produces BEAUTIFUL artistic, grainy, colorful, flawed images (which I want to do also!). They look quite lomographic (I think thats the right word) The guy at the store said if I was going to get an AE-1 that I might as well get the A-1 and that it could do the same and more as the AE-1. Well, basically the A-1 produces images that are "too clear" for me, and even with the same film as my friend uses for her AE-1, it looks almost like a digital photo. I think i'm going to take it back to exchange for an AE-1 instead. Can someone with photo advice help me choose whether or not this is a good idea? Thanks so much for your help.

There is nothing wrong with your camera. If you want flawed images you should just buy a lomo camera or a diana. your friends camera is old and is desperate need of maintaince.

You actually got a well functioning canon a1. (which is an updated model of the ae1.

Really you have two options.
One. Buy a lomo or diane
two. Drop your camera on the floor and throw it in the wash cycle of your washing machine. That ought to damage your camera sufficiently to get the result you are after.

the canon a1 were percise tools made for serious photographers who were serious about learning their craft (exposure, composition and light).
Lomo and diane were toys made for people who find inaccurate, poorly made cameras, artistic

Estevan Oriol Vlog #3: Digital Era Vs. Film Era


film vs digital photography5
film vs digital photography5

Film Vs Digital Photography

1

For digital photography - is "just like film" still the goal?

...or have we surpassed that? I am not trying to start a film vs. digital war, but I am asking whether you think digital photography is still chasing certain qualities of film imagery or if it has gone off in its own directions, with new standards.

"Grain," colors, sharpness, dynamic range...

Whatever you think of is valid, but please try to avoid elevated blood pressures and emotionally charged responses.
My point is NOT to decide whether film is better than digital or not! Please don't go there.

My question is whether you or not think that digital has arrived as its own medium, no longer feeling the pressureto "chase after film."

Yes, film is better and will always BE better at certain things, but digital is better at certain other things.

My point is to ask whether digital has matured into its own tree from the tree from which it fell or if it is still just the red-headed step-child, struggling for recognition in the world.

Just like film is still the goal until the prices of digital cameras decline and technology stabilizes, doesn't obsolete itself so quickly. Achieving something just like film is not available to most consumers unless they purchase expensive cameras, I believe in the $5000-$6000 range. I have a NikonD200, already it is obsolete with the D300 that just came out.

Film Vs Digital_MP4 HD 360.mp4


film vs digital photography5
film vs digital photography5
film vs digital photography5