Film vs Digital Photography

Cluster centers on debates comparing film and digital cameras/sensors in terms of image quality, resolution, dynamic range, unique aesthetic 'look', nostalgia, process, and technical superiority.

📉 Falling 0.4x Hardware
2,184
Comments
20
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#7131
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2007
2
2008
1
2009
20
2010
51
2011
64
2012
85
2013
51
2014
54
2015
102
2016
105
2017
144
2018
108
2019
80
2020
142
2021
148
2022
317
2023
330
2024
137
2025
234
2026
9

Keywords

AI suntimes.com GP VERY ML OK i.e SLR DR FOV film digital cameras camera photography photos capture grain shooting medium

Sample Comments

rimantas Mar 6, 2017 View on HN

Which areas is film superior to the modern sensors?

KennyBlanken Jul 16, 2022 View on HN

Or you can just buy a mid-range digital mirrorless or DSLR camera with a sufficiently wide FOV lens and then crop the photo. Most decent cameras offer an in-camera aspect ratio crop, or various grids, if you want to have the composition assistance.A current sony mirrorless camera will blow the XPan out of the water in every possible sense unless you're shooting VERY high quality, VERY low ISO film, and the exposure time required for working with such a low ISO film means you probably los

periphrasis Sep 9, 2022 View on HN

You certainly can recreate something very similar in post, although that’s a bit like saying chiaroscuro lighting is achievable in charcoal, oil paint, and photography: the effect is still going to be distinct depending on the medium. Digital has a whole host of unique qualities and even some distinct advantages over film. But the image of film has a different quality to it as compared to digital: it simply looks different than digital projection or home video, even if you had a pristine, flawle

wepple May 31, 2018 View on HN

Film has a particular look and feel to it that I’ve absolutely never seen replicated in digital.I’m confident that one day it probably will be; maybe ML will be up to the task where filters and transforms just can’t do the right job?Besides that, the process of taking photographs is surprisingly different. You don’t spray and pray - a shutter costs you more than a dollar so you spend more time looking, and learn to hunt with your eyes more. It’s impossible to check your photos on the LCD,

hellofunk Jan 6, 2016 View on HN

Is it really an issue of image quality? Because while the qualities are different, analog media has its own character. You have to do quite a bit of image manipulation in digital to get that "super 8" look, and it isn't always that convincing. Same with black/white photography vs. digital -- the way a digital chip reacts to light is very different than the way chemicals in film react, and some film stocks have a range and tone that is very hard to emulate with digital images.

photigragraphy Jan 9, 2017 View on HN

As a 'millennial' hobby photographer that enjoys working with film cameras this is great news! However I find some of these comments disheartening.There is a lot of discussion of the merits of film versus digital capture which really isn't the point or why someone would necessarily choose to shoot film today. Much like how a better camera doesn't automatically take better photos the same goes with the film vs digital debate. A camera, and film/digital sensor, is a too

ChuckMcM Apr 1, 2011 View on HN

Your claim "But although the grain effect is available for digital photos, it is seldom seen." is a fallacy. I'm sure if someone wanted a grain effect in their photograph they would be more likely to actually use film rather than use a digital simulation of what film would have looked like had they chosen to do that. I don't see wide spread use of the 'water color' effect either but people still make water color pictures. It is just that they start out with water colors.I was rebutting the cl

raihansaputra Apr 12, 2016 View on HN

yes but it's art. most people would use something that's technically better, but some would prefer to experiment and use older, more unique technology and tools. not saying it's better, but some do prefer polaroids and celluloid films over digital sensor. I for example still use 35mm films for my photos, and there is quite a large number of user and labs around the world to use them properly.

It's pretty amazing the digital-equivalent resolution that actual film has (depends on the film size obviously but if you were to compare average film size to a average 10+ year digital camera it's a huge difference)

jakejake Nov 21, 2012 View on HN

I'm a bit of a film buff, by that I mean I like shooting of film & I own 16mm film cameras. (I shoot most if my work in digital though, so I don't consider myself all that snobby about it)To me some arguments for film hold up, but are rapidly becoming less relevant as digital sensors improve. The biggest case form film to me is the dynamic range (in film terms "latitude") compared to digital. Film is currently still better at retaining detail in high contrast shots (for example a perso