"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...

See as far as teaching goes there are no differences between film
and digital unless you decide to use them.

So I'm right there sis a differnce even more significant when you
teach the subject.


Whisky Dave has given several things that you need to be aware of when using
film, such as

- reciprocity failure at extreme shutter speeds
- need to choose the film type (eg speed, manufacturer, B&W/colour,
slide/neg) before shooting

This raises an interesting philosophical question: do you need to know about
film (and the limitations and issues that only affect film and not digital)
in order to know about photography nowadays?

I would never go so far as to say that film is an obsolete photographic
medium (in the same way that I wouldn't describe vinyl as an obsolete
sound-recording medium), but it's becoming more of a niche product.

Is there anything about photography (the creation of pictures using light)
which you would lose if you didn't teach about film-specific issues like
reciprocity, different light curves of different makes of film, the need to
choose the speed of film before you start shooting, given that these are not
relevant to digital.

Choice of colour v black and white is an after-shooting post-processing
issue with digital (indeed the photographer who took digital photos of my
wedding presented a few shots both in colour and monochrome, with
contrast-enhancement to emulate a B&W negative as opposed to straight
colour-to-monochrome conversion).

Choice of emulsion can be controlled after the event using programs that
alter the gamma curve to emulate different brands of colour slide and
negative film - again, deferring that decision until after shooting.

Choice of ISO speed can be made from shot to shot. When I used film I used
to wish I could do this. As a photographer you need to know why you don't
shoot everything at 3200 ASA (greatly increased noise, maybe different tonal
and colour representation though I can't detect any with my cameras), but
you don't need to decide on a fixed ASA for all shots.

It is not a deficiency of digital that some of these issues do not exist.
Some might even see it as a bonus that you have fewer restrictions like
this.

Of course if your pupils intend to use film as well as digital then they
need to be aware of them, but since most people will only ever use digital,
it may no longer be necessary to know about them, in the same way that we
don't need to know about choosing the correct amount of flash powder to use,
now that everyone uses electronic flash, and we don't need to use a tripod
for every single shot and the subject does not need to remain still for many
seconds now that film/digital sensitivity is a lot higher than it once was.
Knowing that all these restrictions used to exist is probably sufficient.

For example my wedding photographer said that he no longer uses film for any
of his work (portrait, wedding, landscape, buildings, as far as I could see
from his portfolio) because digital allows him to do everything that film
could, but for a minimal per-exposure cost and with fewer restrictions such
as need to choose film before shooting, and inability to preview shots in
the field if necessary. As such, knowledge of film is starting to become
unnecessary.

I must admit in some ways I regret the passing of film: there is something
evocative about the smell of a box of slides or a wallet of prints; the
noise of the projector; watching slides in a darkened room on a silver
screen; the way that a slide would occasionally go out of focus as the
projector lens started to "hunt". And the moment of anticipation when you
first opened the box of slides or the wallet of prints - remembering what
you had taken pictures of, maybe several weeks/months ago, wondering whether
such-and-such tricky shot had "worked" (ie whether you'd estimated the
non-metered exposure correctly).

But I wouldn't want to go back to those days.