I had previously mentioned that the last time I went out to take pictures I took along a digital point and shoot camera to shoot side by side with my Nikon 35mm film SLR. For several shots, I composed it with the Nikon on a tripod, took the shot, then placed the Kodak Easy Share C633 on the tripod and shot the exact same shot with the point and shoot digital. Here are the results. The top photo is film, the bottom photo is digital.I must say I'm impressed with the color and detail of the point and shoot. It compares favorably with the film shot. The only difference between the two shots is the film camera had a circular polarizing filter to cut the amount of glare on the surface of the creek and allow me to take a longer exposure, smoothing out the surface of the water. It also deepened the blue of the creek to near black. The point and shoot does not take a filter (I suppose I could have held the filter in front of the lens, but it was an extremely cold day and I was not terribly motivated to do so.
Different results, different feel to each shot. Take your pick.
So why a point and shoot digital and not a digital SLR? Because most of the rest of the world shoots with point and shoot cameras, and I've started a photo advice blog - Ready, Aim, Click - to provide help and tips to this great big audience of beginning-to-intermediate photographers. So I thought I'd do some practicing of what I'm preaching there. And speaking of which, can you detect any of the several compositional practices I've used to make these photos? The answers are at Ready, Aim Click.
Click on pictures to enlarge. Photographs © 2007 James Jordan.
2 comments:
Which camera takes the more realistic shot?
Hi DaveM,
As far as capturing the color and detail of the scene before me, the digital takes the most accurate shot. As far as creating an artistic rendering of the scene, film is much more flexible. It all depends on what you want to do with a photo.
Post a Comment