Something that was often debated when digital was in its earlier days, which is best? Of course digital has always had the convenience factor & early on film had the quality, but as time & technology advanced there is less & less reason to stay with film. Or is there? I must admit I was quite late to the digital game, I think around 2006, after one of my favourite film cameras, the great Ricoh GR1v, drowned in Latvia I decided to replace it with a Canon G7 compact, a couple of years later a little Olympus DSLR before jumping in & replacing my film SLR with the Canon 5Dii DSLR in 2009, & ever since then I have spent a lot of time & money trying to replicate the look I got with film. But there is something special about film, although digital is getting very close & has surpassed film in many other ways, theres the special feel of the image, like the sound from a vinyl record, its a special something you can't quite put your finger on. The best explanation Ive heard in technical terms is that film deals with changes between highlights & shadows more smoothly, they roll into each other, where as digital, by the very nature of the beast, after all digital is like a switch, its either off or on, it just stops, theres no subtlety between them. Here is a photograph I recently uploaded, made on Ilford XP2 film.
