A&P Digital VS 35MM film

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by wtfmate, Apr 30, 2005.

  1. wtfmate

    wtfmate OT Resident mafia insider

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,946
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    ¿ƃıp ɐʎ ¡uos 'o
    Here I took some shots with a 35MM and my digital rebel

    Cameras used:

    Canon EOS 300D, mostly in 100ISO and no flash, Manual Settings

    Canon EOS 3000, Kodak Gold 200ISO, No flash, Manual Settings

    I am really unhappy with the Kodam Film, very grainy


    Click On Thumbnails for full view

    Film:


    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    DIGITAL:

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  2. Dnepr

    Dnepr Guest

    When i used film, i liked Fuji ISO100-200 rolls, complete name escapes me. .

    Personally I hated Kodak films.
     
  3. wtfmate

    wtfmate OT Resident mafia insider

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,946
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    ¿ƃıp ɐʎ ¡uos 'o
    Yeah I agree, kodak sucks, next time I am going with Fujifilm superia or fujichrome velvia slide film
     
  4. canonshooter

    canonshooter New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    0
    kodak gold is the reason. also, are these scanned negatives or prints? you will be amazed at the difference between kodak gold and velvia.

    by the way kodak makes some of my favorite films, but of course there b&w.
     
  5. Fucker

    Fucker out of the fast lane, bitches

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Messages:
    11,538
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Left Coast
    What are we supposed to compare, blurry film vs. blurry scanned C41?

    Or are we supposed to compare which medium highlights your complete lack of lighting technique and poor composition?
     
  6. vizual

    vizual → 190½ ЯBI ←

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2001
    Messages:
    13,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Gouge Eye, Ca
    :noes:
     
  7. sony

    sony Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    112,721
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    relax! :beer:
     
  8. JordanClarkson

    JordanClarkson OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2002
    Messages:
    59,945
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Go Dodger Blue!
    I don't see much grain :ugh:
    This is grain. crappy Kodak HD 400. 135mm at f11 4s, scanned negative. :run:

    Fuji HD is much better
     
  9. sony

    sony Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    112,721
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    My camera has more noise than that at iso 200. :mamoru:
     
  10. wtfmate

    wtfmate OT Resident mafia insider

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,946
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    ¿ƃıp ɐʎ ¡uos 'o
    :rofl:
     
  11. wtfmate

    wtfmate OT Resident mafia insider

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,946
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    ¿ƃıp ɐʎ ¡uos 'o
    wow, thats some serious noise
     

Share This Page