Digital vs Film

[Canuck]

I use the Coolpix 3500 Digital and am quite impressed with the ease of operation and image "tweakability". It has a Macro function that allows me to get within 1.5 inches of the subject. The camera comes with Photoshop elements which is great but now I want the full version! As far as lighting goes I have nothing fancy just my positionable work light at the workbench with a 100w bulb. The room is lit by flourescent lights. All my progress shots are taken here.

When I take pics of completed models against a backdrop I try to do that outside in natural light.

Anyone want to post a how to on composing digital portraits using Adobe Photoshop. ie. cloning aircraft to represent formation flying etc?

Barry

If this is in the wrong forum, could someone move it for me please? :o

Edited January 16, 2004 by Canuck

[MaRiO FDZ]

I prefer Digital

For time and quality

BY FAR!!

Take Care

[volzj]

Digital all the way here. Switched last spring and will never look back. This is from an avid photographer.

One of the keys to successful model photography is LIGHT and plenty of it, especially where digital is concerned. Get outside, natural light is best, and of course if you don't like the color cast you get you can always adjust the white blance or color temp.

Experiment away with the digital medium. That's the great thing... It's free.

Make sure you really need all that Photoshop has to ofer before you plunk down the cash. It's a pretty penny.

[Grey Ghost 531]

Digital. I have a Sony that records onto erasible/rewritable mini-CDs so I can go to a museum or airshow and take as many pictures as I want of anything at every angle and then delete the ones I don't want. You can't do that with film.

It is a little harder to take candid photos because the camera takes a second or so to sort itself out when you press the button. Auto focus, auto exposure.

[Andy Mullen]

Nikon Coolpix 775 (modelling) & Minolta Riva Zoom 70EX (Normal photos). The Minolta was my first "real" camera, as previously Id used a Kodak Instamatic. When I started back into modelling I decided to get myself a Digital. Since getting the Nikon Ive hardly used the Minolta.

[Chris]

I use a digital for my inprogress shots, an olypus (my sister picked it up while abroad in Japan and never got the patch to change it to an english language camera so its all in Japanese) and a Nikon SLR for the finished shots.

[Skyking]

I guess I will be the odd-man-out on this one. I use both. I use digital for reference shots, and anything I want to publish on the web. If it's something that I want good razor sharp resolution and longevity, and to make large image posters out of, then I go with Print Film. When you consider a standard 35mm frame of Kodacolor II has roughly 18 MEG of resolution, you can see that you have to spend a ton of money in digital to get what you can get with a decent SLR and roll film. Also with regular film, there is only 3 layers of light sensitive material for the image to pass through, one for each color. In the digital world, you have to have 4 pixels to capture the same amount of data. One each for cyan, magenta, blue and black. Therefore your 4 megapixel camera really only has 1 meg of image resolution, because it takes 4 pixels to get the color data. This was explained to me by someone that works in a color lab at Kodak, so I understand he may be a bit biased, but I still don't think for picture clarity, depth of color, and longevity, you can beat roll film. For ease of use, general reference and for composing photos before using a film camera, then Digital has it's place as well. For what it's worth, all the pictures I've taken of the NC4 were with my Fuji Finepix 3800, but when the model is done, I'll use a 35mm with 800 speed Color Film for the "portrait" shots.

Cheers

Mike

[Scalephantomphixer]

DIGITAL all the time! I shoot with a Nikon Coolpix5000, which allows me to take the macro pictures you know from my postings to this forum. I recently purchased a 1/1 macro add-on lens, which I still need to try.

Cheers,

Pierre

[Bob Perry]

The digital stuff has its advantages but I'm not ready.

I'm not sure the technology has stabilised yet. It seems like improvements are coming fast and furious so I'd be reluctant to make the big switch and end up wanting to upgrade relatively soon. Betamax anyone?

Second, what's happening with prices? Aren't they coming down, even as the tech side improves? Seems like computers.

Most important to me - I am still very happy with 35 mm. My present equipment does everything required of it. If anything, I'm considering chucking the auto-everything Canon and going back to my manual focus SLR. I slow down, shoot less film and get better quality.

Besides, what do I do with the several thousand slides and negatives I already have?

[jmel]

I use a digital for picture-taking of models, and I use film for my real-life aviation photography.

By the way, does anyone have any interest in a Canon Rebel Ti less than a year old?

Jake

[Steve Filak]

Digital all the way for me. Since I bought the Coolpix 995 two years ago, my Pentax K1000 hasn't even come out of the bag. My lighting setup consists of four 100 watt portable floodlights (the cheap, clamp-on type that you get at the hardware store), combined with an overhead 4' fluorescent light, with a 12' roll of craft paper that I use for a backdrop over a steel shop table.

For me, it's all about economization of time and money. I really don't have time to sit around and scan photos, and I like the fact that the digicam gives me instant feedback on how my shot looks - if it's crappy, I simply delete it and try again.. I couldn't tell you how much money I wasted developing film when I first began to photograph my models.

Not to take anything away from 35mm cameras, but at least for me and my lifestyle, digital photography is the way to go. Eventaully, I may upgrade to something like a Nikon 5700, but to be very honest, I really don't need it - the 995 does everything that I need it to do, and I can get very nice quality prints with my HP printer.

Edit: It seems as though this should be in Tools N Tips, so I moved it over here.......

[madmike]

I have a Kodak DC290 digital camera, 2.1mp 3 optical and 2 digital zoom max pic size of 2240x1500. It is a marvellous camera which I purchased from a friend who upgraded to a newer Kodak model.

Like every one else, I cannot quite lick the lighting issue as yet. I use blue card backdrops to reduce the light reflect and set this all up on the dining room table with a large window at my back, to provide natural light. This has helped a lot, though I am still not entirely happy. Next step might be some photographers floods.

Thank god for Paintshop Pro, at least I can tweak the images a bit to improve the lighting!

I have not used my Yashica 35mm camera since I got the DC290 and probably never will!

;)

MikeJ

[Guest Johnny]

Man i just bought one of the new Sony's 5.0 megapixels, can take any amount of photos i want since it uses the memory sticks for its memory and get this it takes mpeg movie recordings as well, thats right i can use it like a video camera and upload the movie files to my compter then burn them to a CD now thats an awesome feature if u ask me....

John ;)

[MickeyThickey]

Man i just bought one of the new Sony's 5.0 megapixels, can take any amount of photos i want since it uses the memory sticks for its memory

You can't take 2 gigs worth of photos, 'cause it doesn't use Compact Flash. :P And you're paying roughly twice the price per MB than CF, too. (three times if you go the Microdrive route) ;)

[phantom]

The digital stuff has its advantages but I'm not ready.

I'm not sure the technology has stabilised yet. It seems like improvements are coming fast and furious so I'd be reluctant to make the big switch and end up wanting to upgrade relatively soon. Betamax anyone?

Second, what's happening with prices? Aren't they coming down, even as the tech side improves? Seems like computers.

Most important to me - I am still very happy with 35 mm. My present equipment does everything required of it. If anything, I'm considering chucking the auto-everything Canon and going back to my manual focus SLR. I slow down, shoot less film and get better quality.

Besides, what do I do with the several thousand slides and negatives I already have?

Im with Bob Perry, I like my old camera,

Not in the mood for a whole new format. Now if you will excuse me Im off to listen to my 8 tracks. ;)

[kaysersoze]

digital for the model pix (kodak DX6340)

a normal aps camera for all other photo needs.

digital pix are better to be altered with a pc cos of all the software they come with.

[karlwb]

Digital - ;)

Fuji FinePix A303. :P

[f14peter]

Here's the Readers Digest version of using PhotoShop for image manipulation. First off, familiarize yourself with some of the program's basic functions.

The biggest asset of the program, at least for this kind of work, is using layers . . . and it's just what it sounds like. Everything goes on its own layer, which can be moved, sized, manipulated, stacked in any order you wish, whatever, all on its own. It'll get clearer as I explain further.

When it comes to working with pictures of models, the first question is what is your backdrop going to be? The first thing I'll do after formulating the concept in my mind is to pick the background. This will dictate the angle and perspective of how you photograph your model, as well as determine how it will be lit so shadows and highlights match between model and background. Pick the background, and then shoot several photos of the model in the appropriate perspective. If you want to add additional planes utilizing the same model, change the angle slightly and back off a bit. When you do shoot your model, use a plain,single colored sheet of paper, cardboard, posterboard, whatever. The goal is to have a uniform and contrasting color behind your model . . . that will make it easier to remove later.

When it comes to putting the image together, open up the background in one sub-window (Inside PS) and the model photo in another. You can transfer the model photo to the background photo a couple of different ways . . . easiest is CNTR A to highlight the entire image, CNTR C to copy it, then click in the background window and CNTR V to paste the copied image. An alternative is to use the "Lasso" tool to highlight just the area around the model (I usually don't try to perfectly outline the model, just the model and some space around it), and the the CNTR C and V functions. It will paste onto a new layer. Each layer can be sized and moved however you wish.

You can then go around and trim away any part of the model's image you want to by using the "Eraser" tool, or the "Lasso" tool to highlight an area that you'll then delete. Use the zoom in tool (Magnifying glass) to enlarge the area so you can work with finer detail. Keep zooming back out to see how it looks (think of it as test fitting a part!). One helpful thing is to insert a blank layer underneath the model image, and then fill it with a contrasting color or black or white. This will help show where you need to trim/erase more around the model. If the area around your model is all one color, one time saver is to highlight with the "Magic wand" tool, although this is probably better used to do rough trimming as it's not as precise as the other methods. I'll typically use the "lasso" tool to clear the bulk of the unwanted stuff out of the way, then go after the close-in work.

You can have as many layers as you wish (I've had images I've used at work that have consisted of over 60 layers!) each one independantly manipulatable (Is that a word?). One thing: When you paste one image into another, it will go in the sequence of layers above whatever layer you have currently illuminated.

The highlight tools can be used to copy just a portion of an image. Hightlight what you want, then CNTR C to copy, CNTR V to paste and it goes into its own layer. I'll give a more in-depth explaination below.

If you want to duplicate a layer, make sure it's the layer highlighted, then pull down the "Layer" menu and you'll see a "Duplicate" layer selection. This is very useful as I like to keep an original layer and manipulate a copy. Another trick is if you want to move, resize, etc more than one layer at a time, they can be linked so everything happens to the linked layers the same. If you want to make one layer out of many, link them together and there's a "Merge layers" selection on the layers drop-down menu.

Each layer can also have its chromanence, luminence, brightness, etc manipulated independantly. This is useful when making the different layers match up and appear to be part of the same, original image. Filters can also be applied to each layer.

Here's a couple of examples:

- I picked the photo of the ship (IIRC, from the Royal Navy's website) and determined how I wanted the model to be incorporated, then photographed it accordingly (Making sure shadows fell the same direction, or close to, the background pic). After pasting it into the background picture and resizing, I used the "Eraser" tool to eliminate the landing gear and its doors, and everypart around the model. Although there's a variety of ways to make the canopy appear semi-transparent, here's what I did: Clicking the layer of the background, I highlighted and copied the area of the water underneath where the canopy was, then pasted it on a layer ABOVE the model (After copying the highlighted portion, I clicked on the layer with the model so the new layer would go above it). I adjusted the opacity of that layer so it was as transparant as I wanted, then went in (Zoomed way in to see the fine detail) and erased the parts that covered the fuselage, canopy, crew helmets, etc. Not a very good description I know, but try something similar and you'll see how it works.

For the next image, I did the same thing first . . . found an image I wanted to use (Which included the three groundcrewmen walking away from the line of F-15s) and then photo'd the model to suit the scene. After the resizing and erasing the unwanted junk, I erased the part of the model that covered up the crewmen, making it appear as if the model is far behind them. Helpful hint: When doing things like this, I'll adjust the opacity of the top layer so that I can see both layers at once. Therefore, I can see more precisely where to erase. The opacity can then be returned to normal (100%). I also added some shading by inserting a blank layer above the model layer, colored in black where I needed, then adjusting the opacity of that layer to appear like a shadow. Transparancy of the canopy was done the same as the first picture, although there's more than one way to skin that cat.

As I mentioned before, once I get the model in the image, I'll make a duplicate layer to make changes to and keep an original, unmanipulated layer. That allows me to go back and start over if I so screw it up that I've lost the effect I'm after. Also, you can make duplicates of duplicates so that each time you make a significant change, you can copy the layer.

As always, SAVE YOUR WORK OFTEN!!!!!!!!!!!! And I suggest always keeping a PhotoShop file type copy of your work so you can go back and keep playing with the image, or add more. Once you have an image you like and want to save in a different format, pull down the "File" menu and instead of "Save as", use the "Save a copy" function, which will save the image in any format you want, and it keeps the original file up and unchanged.

A lot of stuff to digest, yet not a lot of stuff to answer all your questions. Feel free to email me with more questions . . . always happy to talk models and imaging.

Peter

[Ricardo]

My vote: digital.

Ricardo

[PPT_Ranger]

Digital: SONY MVC-CD500 CD Mavica, 5.0 Megapixel, 1.6" Macro Focus Distance.

PS Elements and PS Album are great tools for the amateur photog for fixing photos for web photos and archiving. If you need more features to do things that Peter described then PS is the way to go.

BTW, you can tryout a 30 day eval copy of Photoshop CS here:

Adobe tryout page

[Baxik]

Digital! Nikon 4500 - my choice!

[habu2]

Canon F-1 with a bag full of FD lenses. I have too much invested in my gear to switch over to digital. Its not a matter of technology or convenience. I'm way too far down this road to change directions.

[Ivanho4]

I purchased a Sony DSC-S85 Cybershot 4.13 mp camera with a Carl Zeiss zoom lens. I tend to shoot high resolution and resize as needed if I'm sending images via email, etc. I like the automatic features well enough, but frequently revert to manual override so I have more flexibility. ;) ;) Ivan

[MikeV]

I like the ease of using a digital but a good quality 35mm or bigger still takes better quality photos I think.

Especially the newer ones like the I am a spammer....please report this post..

Mike