Hold a wake, or still awake?
By Robert de Gast 

Can film survive the digital revolution, or is it already dead? Baltimore, one of the largest cities in the United States, no longer has a custom film lab. I'm told there's only one place in the country where you can still get your Kodachrome slides processed. Kodak has stopped making photographic paper. Benjamin Disraeli, the British statesman, once pronounced: "I have been ever of opinion that revolutions are not to be evaded." The digital revolution has been here for some time. Two years ago the sale of digital cameras overtook that of film cameras. Last year digital cameras accounted for 90 percent of camera sales worldwide. Nevertheless, some of us continue to agonize about the revolution and the merits (and demerits) of the new tools. 

Some benefits of digital photography:

Digital cameras offer instant review of the photo you made via a color LCD screen.

There are no film and processing costs. This helps you pay for your camera over time.

Memory cards hold a lot more photos than the 24- or 36-exposure, 35-mm film rolls.

You can delete any image you don't like, instantly.

Exposures and color balance are far more accurate (or can be easily tweaked).

Digital cameras have fewer moving parts and thus are considerably quieter.

The danger of airport x-rays does not apply to digital cameras.

Images can be loaded into a printer without a computer or into a computer without scanning.

Digital cameras can be designed to be far smaller than film cameras.

Digital files can be readily organized into searchable "albums" that take up no storage space.

You can readily print excellent-quality pictures with inexpensive inkjet printers.


Some disadvantages of digital photography:

The shutter delay on many digital cameras is extremely frustrating.

Prints from inkjet printers fade faster than prints from film on photo paper.

Maintaining color accuracy from camera to monitor to printer is not easy.

There are still no reliable industry standards for digital products.

Digital cameras use up batteries at alarming rates, so more rechargeable batteries and a charger become necessities.

It is virtually impossible to see the image on the LCD screen in bright sunlight.

A computer is generally required to take full advantage of the digital environment.

At high ISO (sensitivity) settings, image quality rapidly deteriorates.

The focal length of interchangeable lenses for most SLRs requires a 1.5× or 1.6× multiplier, and wide-angle lenses are very expensive.

Disposable digital cameras are only available in the United States at Ritz Photo stores and CVS pharmacies and prints cost about a dollar each, four times the cost of digital pictures ordered at kiosks.

Very small cameras are difficult to hold steady (and to hold, for folks with large hands).

High-resolution digital cameras are on average twice as expensive as comparable film cameras.

Some photographers are keeping a foot in both camps. There'll always be a place for both systems. The answer to the question "Is film dead?" is a resounding "no." The patient is alive, just not as active. 

In the end, the system you choose, whether digital or film, is not very important. Good photographs are made by folks with a sense of purpose, passion and perception. Cameras are just tools.


Robert de Gast is a professional photographer and the author of nine books. He offers short photography tutorials and conducts workshops and tours. He can be reached at 152-7396 or at robertdegast@hotmail.com