How does digital photography differ from traditional photography?
I have taken basic photography and would like to learn digital photography.
Related posts
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
I have taken basic photography and would like to learn digital photography.
i think traditional (i mean since you learned it…) is like basically like setting up the light meter and etc. for each shot. its more “olden days” while digital is you get to see the shot and its more computerized
digital is a lot more advanced and u can do a lot ore with the actuall photo
Digital photography is done with a digital camera instead of film. And I’m sure you learn how to edit the pictures and adjust the exposure and contrast and whatnot.
Apparently, digital is done with artificial intelligence.
You can use all the skills you learned in school … but no darkroom work.
The other half of digital photography is all about computer skills and learning how to use digital darkroom programs like Photoshop.
On the money side, digital photography is far more expensive than film photography …
You can buy a good professional 35mm SLR and it will last for decades … all the film you shoot for clients is purchased by them and they pay for all the processing.
Digital cameras have to be replaced every three or four years (at between $5000 to $8000 each) and while the lenses for the 35mm cameras will work just fine on the DSLR, you are stuck with buying two computers every three to four years too (one for the office and a notebook for location shoots)
So you can see that for a photographer, the overhead using digital cameras has gone up, while the perception is that it costs less to produce digital images … The cost of school is still about the same, ($75,000 to $100,000 a year for two years).
When taking the shot nothing is different from what you learned, only the recording medium is changed from film to a digital sensor. Which offers a lot of advantages, instantly see the results, no film / developing costs and editing is easier as you can see any changes you apply instantly.
Chris
f-stops and shutter speeds are all the same. Only now you need to know how to use your computer and software to edit your photos.
In photography, the differences are the prints. The larger the film gets the more pixels it gets. In 35 mm SLR – shooting the best shots, with using a very good lens, you can get 20 millions pixels. Right now I have only seen 12.2 million pixels (in Digital SLR), and have heard of 16 millions pixels (however, I don’t know if they have it on DSLR – Digital single lens reflex).
The single-lens reflex (SLR) camera uses an automatic moving mirror system which permits the photographer to see exactly what will be captured by the film or digital imaging system, as opposed to non-SLR cameras where the view through the viewfinder could be significantly different from what was captured on film.
Without getting too technical, films tend to capture color more in depth than with digital. Although, digital is getting there, or maybe it’s there already – as the pixels gets bigger and the color coding gets better. The bigger the print the more pixels you need for certain clarity you are looking for – mostly if you are commercial photography or as an artist. There are also larger film formats like 220 mm.
Then there’s that environmental factor to consider, too. With films, you need chemicals to process them. With digital, you have LCD you have to think about when disposing your digital camera. Films do however, use more chemicals.
Although digital camera is expensive to buy, in the long run, it is cheaper because you don’t have to buy films and have it processed.
You can still make a good living with both digital and film cameras. It is a matter of who is taking the picture.
One big differences I think with both style of photography, is Discipline. You don’t want to make a lot of mistake with film because of time and cost.
Film is still used mostly in movies that are produced today, why do you think that is still the case.