What’s Your Preference?

hellraiserASC · #1 (**permalink**) 12-13-2010, 10:58 AM

Some colleges want to know if I want to major in photography or digital photography. As well the use of two different cameras, what the real variation

PowerPix · #2 (**permalink**) 12-13-2010, 12:19 PM

It's Film (traditional "photography") vs. Digital.

Film produces photos that are more realistic and in tune with the what you actually shot. Digital allows you to freely alter what a photograph is -- easily manipulated.

That is the variation.

OsmosisStudios · #3 (**permalink**) 12-13-2010, 02:25 PM

Depends on the school. Some will say "photography" as they cover both film and digital. I'd wager that most of these programs are going to be the better ones

dakwegmo · #4 (**permalink**) 12-13-2010, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hellraiserASC

Some colleges want to know if I want to major in photography or digital photography. As well the use of two different cameras, what the real variation

You should contact each of the schools and find out what they say the differences are.

Jim Bryant · #5 (**permalink**) 12-13-2010, 03:40 PM

Go to one that offers both. In traditional film, you'll learn more about light and exposures and how it affects film.

Camera · #6 (**permalink**) 12-13-2010, 04:14 PM

I'm new here.appreciate great help.

Biomech · #7 (**permalink**) 12-13-2010, 05:00 PM

In the UK it seems that "Photography" degrees are steeped in history and art appreciation and hardly anything to do with the technical side - some uni graduates with degrees coming out not knowing what aperture is. Digitally photography seems to include a high degree of digital processing - workflow, processing, photoshop etc

Photologyst · #8 (**permalink**) 12-13-2010, 05:10 PM

Regardless of film or digital they ALL involve post shoot processing. Film is done in the chemical darkroom, where one has to be super skilled and does not have as much control. Digital is done in the digi-”lightroom” on a computer. One also has to be skilled, but it’s easy to start over again. The only cost is time. . .

I would say that it is wise to take some film classes because one learns a great deal about the art of seeing, lighting, setting the camera, etc. OTOH, it depends entirely on the prof and how good s/he is.

No matter what, you should learn how to use the camera in the dark.

nickbedford · #9 (**permalink**) 12-13-2010, 10:44 PM

It's amazing how "revered" film is. As great as film is and what it can produce, to me, film is simply the "original" way of capturing photographs. Sure, there's many different things you can achieve with both, but in this current day and age, photography is photography and whether it's digital or it's film it doesn't really matter.

People always go on and on about "gear" not making a photographer, so why do people not say this about film vs digital? Film is just "gear" used to capture a photograph.

I've done some developing in the dark room when I was in primary school but it hasn't helped me be a "better photographer". The first step I took was to start shooting manual. Ever since doing that I've grown to understand exposure, not by using film. Composition is something that is independent of the medium to which you're recording. Composition is about the photograph, not the file or the film strip.

Exposing for a photo is still the same, for those who go manual. It's just that you can *guarantee* your exposure which is paramount to delivering results for businesses and other things.

It's like saying an abacus is just... "better" than using a calculator despite the disadvantages.

Mind you, I love photographs that have been taken on film (by good photographers that is). I especially like it in film as it adds something more. I just don't see this whole deal about "having" to do film to be a photographer.

My 2c.