FA+
Shop
2021
Posted 4 years agoIt's been a good while since I have published much online consistently, but in the name of all that has been happening this and last year, I urge everyone...
...be safe. Be careful. Be loved.
...be safe. Be careful. Be loved.
27
Posted 5 years agoLevel up!
I made it another year, here's to hoping I make it to 28 still doing well!
I made it another year, here's to hoping I make it to 28 still doing well!
25
Posted 7 years agoWheeeeee, a quarter of a century old!
Fey
Posted 9 years agoFilm vs. Digital?
Posted 11 years agoAfter a fun chat with 
Devillen last night and some back and forth between my professor and I, I felt like sending this question out to anyone who reads my Journals.
Do you prefer using Film cameras or Digital for Photography?
I'm mot comfortable with digital, as I've been shooting with the medium nearly 5-8 years. Digital is what I go for for Photoshoots, Journalism, any kind of professional gig, and times when I need unlimited shots possible. But when I can have the chance to be lavish or artistic, I'll gladly go to the irreplaceable effect and feel of film.
I've become pretty comfortable with a mixture of the two for a lot of my work, by developing my film negatives and then scanning to digitally edit and make prints. I do this both for the sake of providing myself the best control over the outcome, but also the much more prevalent issue of the expensive paper needed for prints, as well as all the chemicals and specialized equipment.
I once had another student back in high school who, upon learning I did digital editing, promptly told me that if I had to do ANYTHING to a photo out of camera, I didn't shoot it right. Personally, I find this opinion disagreeable, and feel that that choice is something entirely up to the photographer and his/her idea on how the piece should come out. But others have a different opinion.
If anyone feels either way, tell me what you think?
Devillen last night and some back and forth between my professor and I, I felt like sending this question out to anyone who reads my Journals.Do you prefer using Film cameras or Digital for Photography?
I'm mot comfortable with digital, as I've been shooting with the medium nearly 5-8 years. Digital is what I go for for Photoshoots, Journalism, any kind of professional gig, and times when I need unlimited shots possible. But when I can have the chance to be lavish or artistic, I'll gladly go to the irreplaceable effect and feel of film.
I've become pretty comfortable with a mixture of the two for a lot of my work, by developing my film negatives and then scanning to digitally edit and make prints. I do this both for the sake of providing myself the best control over the outcome, but also the much more prevalent issue of the expensive paper needed for prints, as well as all the chemicals and specialized equipment.
I once had another student back in high school who, upon learning I did digital editing, promptly told me that if I had to do ANYTHING to a photo out of camera, I didn't shoot it right. Personally, I find this opinion disagreeable, and feel that that choice is something entirely up to the photographer and his/her idea on how the piece should come out. But others have a different opinion.
If anyone feels either way, tell me what you think?
