Digital Myths and Realities

If I have an axe to grind, it’s this: it seems that the digital converts are so taken with their new ‘religion’ that anyone that doesn’t follow their ideology is just another wasted soul. They seem to have no patience for any point of view that doesn’t match theirs.

Myth 1 – Digital is better than film. [W]hat really shocked me was the huge difference in how the two media record the same scene. Velvia gave me renditions that on the light table were snappy and dripping wet with color....The Canon 1ds produced renditions that were flat and pale by comparison. [I]t soon became obvious to me that in-camera capture was just a starting point with the [Canon] 1ds...

Myth 2 – Digital saves you time. [F]or me, shooting digital meant much more time in front of the computer both in the field and at home. With film, I spent less time in front of the computer and more time shooting and the results tend to be stronger and more cohesive.

Myth 3 – Digital makes you a more creative photographer. My stock agencies love the quality of digital camera files, they love digital delivery, and e-commerce, and they love not handling irreplaceable original slides, but ask them if digital cameras have improved the creativity of shooters and the answer they give may surprise you.

Myth 4 – Digital Photography offers more Creative Techniques than film. No, digital offers different means of expression than film.... If you plan to specialize in shooting landscapes by moonlight or if you go on long backpacking trips into the wilderness then film is the wisest choice. If you want to shoot intricate studio lighting set-ups, do wildlife photography, or specialize in motion effects, I would recommend digital.