Seven days of shooting film was a relief of sorts, since I wasn't putting any particular pressure on the photos. It was experimental. A way of spending time with the camera. I have to say that after a few hundred frames, I like the film camera as well as the digital.
The big surprise was getting the film developed. I shot Fuji Superia 400 print film, then took it to Costco for development, prints and digital files. The online reviews of Costco are generally good when development and printing are analyzed. I was very happy with the quality of negatives and prints. The digital files are poor from the Costco I used (the large amount of heavy grain in the digital example shown below does not exist in the neg or print). But with the masters (negatives) and prints in good shape, it doesn't matter much to me.
Posts
Going back and forth between the film to digital and all digital picture I can't really see the difference. Could be the resolution limitations of my monitor.
ReplyDeleteYep, there isn't much difference onscreen. Both formats are displayed in digital on the Web, of course - at that point it is oranges versus oranges.
ReplyDeleteI can see a lot of grain in the Film-to-Digital files, though, particularly in the skies. The film I shot on the road trip was Fuji Superia 400. It developed and printed very nicely - very smooth, nearly grainless - but the scanner settings could have been better.