In reply to seduti:

Dear James,
a simple answer is that I use Phase one.
the more truthfull answer is that all this technical detail is so unimportant compared to the issues that really concern me when I am working.
It is like asking a writter what sort of pen they use.
The digital /non digital debate is just a waste of time.
The only difference is the archiving problems that digital throws up,and that issue is still not resolved.
Sorry to rant on .
Nick

In reply to nick knight:

I agree, storage is an issue.

The DNG format for archiving seems to be a hot topic at the moment, although im not sure Capture One/Phase One support it?
more info at - http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/index.html

For me the jury is still out on DNG and its not taken off the way it was expected to. It is still a baby on the scene and is only - what - one year old?
I don't feel guilty about wariness to change two years and thousands of files over so soon.

With all of this in mind I really don't understand what DNG offers until a DNG file will work in all software from all manufacturers therefore becoming a future proof standard.

Now its my turn to rant! sorry.

Thanks for getting back to me.
James

In reply to seduti:

Shooting tethered to a computer is the biggest difference compared to shooting film, I think. Some love it, some hate it. Nick, how do you feel about that - having worked a lot with polaroid film?

Jussi

In reply to rovis:

I agree with Nick talking about different formats can get a bit anorake and boring.
What is important is getting the results you want the best way that you can using any combination or all.
With floppy disks now becoming obsolete as will CD in the future and possibly memory stick at a later date storage of digital media could well cause a problem in 10-15 years time.
I am glad that I still start with negative film

In reply to Chris Summerfield:

I still love shooting with film when I do my own I think there's something really magical about the fact that light onto film and images are capture that way.

In reply to KaWai:

ah damn, film must make it back into the market. that's most true about keeping files. i've lost a fair bit of images in digital storage. whatever i've shot on film are still intact. i've to stake this claim that images digitised from transparencies/negatives does contain more tonal information.

like how quarter inch open reels sound much better than SACDs.

In reply to BillySoh:

That is a problem; especially with 35mm film it is hard to get a wide range of asa speeds now.

In reply to Chris Summerfield:

alas! they gotta come back somehow.

it'll be horrific to see any digital images that's being transmitted around the globe getting infected with viruses along the way. who knows what would be next. i hear apples starting to get infected.

In reply to rovis:

Doesn't bother me in the slightest.The camera is always the least important thing on a shoot.