Minolta Hi-Matic AF2 | Kodak Ultramax 400

    • Album@lemmy.ca
      6·
      6 months ago

      Real film grain gives a pre-process dithered softness to detail that I personally think isn’t really reproduced in digital post processing.

      • GenericJeebus@lemmy.worldOP
        3·
        6 months ago

        I agree, I’ve previously dabbled around with adding grain digitally, if you look at my post history you’ll see a picture from Las Vegas a few years back that I went waaay overboard with unfortunately, though at the time I’d been using Lightroom for only about a week or so. I definitely have room to improve but I’ve found using real film and then adjusting colors, contrast, etc. In post results in a much nicer picture, albeit quite a lot more expensive to produce lol

        • Glifted@lemmy.world
          2·
          6 months ago

          I don’t know man, I started on 35mm, then went to digital, and then graduated to “whatever shitphone is in my pocket”. Film definitely has a different feel to it, though I don’t know that it’s necessarily better or worse. Just different.

          Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad some folks are keeping film alive. I just don’t find it to be that much better.

          • GenericJeebus@lemmy.worldOP
            3·
            6 months ago

            Oh no I totally get that! I just meant when I’m going for an older feeling photo with a bit of nostalgia factor to it I’ve found that using real film gets the look that I’m going for better, I should’ve been more specific. It’s all subjective really but I’ve also taken thousands of photos on different digital cameras and smartphones as well, they’re objectively cheaper and more convenient for sure, but I don’t think one is better or worse than the other.