A Digital Photography Primer

by Bruce Ogletree

(Underlined terms are defined below)

The trend towards digital photography is well underway and gaining momentum. With this process film, Polaroids, processing , and scanning are eliminated and images are captured directly as digital computer files. Following are some of the advantages of direct-to-digital capture.

• Immediate preview and digital analysis of image. The photographer and client can see exactly what has been photographed and the photographer can evaluate the image for proper exposure, color, shadow detail and highlight detail. This eliminates a great deal of the guesswork and uncertainty which often goes along with film capture.
  
• Faster production turn-around. The need to send film for processing and scanning can cut days from the production process.
  
• Cost reduction. On large projects the money saved on film scanning can be substantial.

As good as it is, digital capture technology has yet to completely overshadow traditional film technology. Here are some of the ways in which film has it over digital.

• Film technology is well-established and remains the most stable and compact way to store high-resolution image information. A properly produced 4x5 or 8x10 inch transparency can be enlarged with greater fidelity than even the best digitally captured image. Drum scans from film are the medium of choice of most graphic arts professionals.
  
• Film travels more easily in most cases. High-end digital work stations (camera, tripod, computer, cables, table) are unwieldy in comparison to the simple camera and tripod of traditional film technology. Hand-held digital cameras are limited in resolution and cannot capture images as quickly and simply as film cameras.
  
• Color issues are easier to track. When viewed in a color-correct environment, a transparency can be evaluated to the satisfaction of the photographer and client before it moves down the production chain. Past that point, it is the responsibility of the graphic artist to insure that the printer delivers an on-color product. In the case of digital capture, lack of standardization of monitors and color profiles makes it extremely difficult to know with certainty that a shot is "on color", and rampant finger pointing can result. On a digital project, very close integration and cooperation between the photographer, graphic artist, and printer is essential to keep from running into color problems and the additional expenses they can entail. The cost of this coordination is factored into the fee structure whether the job is produced turn-key by a large graphics house or jobbed out to different entities.
  
• Most film goes to digital anyway. New technology continues to drive down the costs of film scanning, and many printers include the costs of scanning in their print bids. Both transparencies and negatives can be scanned to almost any size and retouched and distributed with the same ease as directly captured digital files.

With these and other factors coming into play, the decision to go with film or digital requires that one analyze a matrix of often confusing factors. I think that it is important to state that the wrong reason to shoot digitally is because it is the "latest thing". Technology is wonderful and neat, and I love the new toys as much (maybe more) than the next person, but one must look at the overall goal before making the film-vs-digital decision. I will try to lay out some basic scenarios that should prove helpful.

Go digital if:

• "Positioning is critical. We have to know it's there." Direct-to-digital capture provides immediate visualization of the actual shot. Hand position, facial expression and other fugitive aspects of the photo can be evaluated before moving on to the next shot or dismissing the model. With film you don't know for sure until you get film back from the lab.
• "We gotta have it now!!" With everything in place, a digital photograph can go into the production chain within minutes. When waiting a day or two simply isn't an option, go digital.
• "Film and scanning costs are eating us up." If the volume of shooting is so high that film and scanning costs are a major portion of the budget, digital can be the answer. Remember that the costs of the photographer's investment in purchase or rental and the fees for production coordination will factor in to the equation.

Go with film if:

• "This is not a high-volume photo shoot". Film and scanning costs are not a major part of the production budget. Let your graphic artist and printer make sure that the printed piece matches the film.
• "This is a location shoot and mobility is a necessity". Unless one of the scenarios mentioned under "Go digital if" applies, film is generally a better choice when shooting on location and moving about, or in an environments not friendly to delicate electronics (dirty, dusty, hot, or cold places to name a few).
• "The photographer we want to use says film is the best way". If the shooting style of the photographer is an important part of the project, don't force him or her to shoot in a medium which might restrict their creativity.
• "Kodak Photo CD scans will work for us". Many people are taking advantage of the relatively low cost (as little as 90 cents a scan!) of Kodak's film scanning technology. Tremendous cost savings and flexibility of film format can be achieved using this process.

At this point you may be saying, "Gee, I thought digital was the wave of the future. Why aren't you more enthusiastic about it?" Personally, I am convinced that digital is the wave of the future and I am very excited about this new technology. I recommend it to my clients, but only when it makes sense to do so. Digital cameras are a great new tool, but they represent a young and growing technology. Film technology is more than 100 years old, and improvements continue to be made. Eventually digital technology will come of age and the only people shooting on film will be the fine artists or entrenched Ludites, but that day has yet to come.

Some Frequently Asked Questions:

"What makes digital photography such a hot item?"
Basically, two things - desktop publishing and digital retouching. With the advent of these computer-based technologies, it has become possible create images and assemble publications that would require much greater time and effort (read MONEY) to produce using older techniques. Desktop publishing and digital retouching require digital image files, formerly obtainable only by scanning a transparency or print. A digital cameras uses a special imaging chip to translate what the camera sees into a digital file, bypassing the process of shooting Polaroids, exposing and processing film, and scanning the film. Cost reduction and faster job turn-around are the main potential advantages.

"If digital capture eliminates the costs of film and scanning, why isn't it always cheaper to shoot digitally?"
A digital shoot presents technical challenges which require time to work through, and the cooperation of many different professionals along the production chain. Digital workstations are exponentially more expensive than regular film cameras, and these costs must be recaptured by the photographer. The production process involved in a regular film shoot is second nature to professional photographers, graphic artists, and printers. It is not as important for everyone to hold hands during the process of producing a printed piece from film, thus it is not as time-consuming (and expensive) a process.

"I am getting conflicting advice on whether to shoot digitally or not. Whom do I believe?"
Basically, the person who doesn't stand to gain or lose your business based on your decision. A production facility that specializes in digital photography will naturally assert that they can fulfill your needs, and if your needs are simple, this is probably so. But if you need special talents, or want to be sure that your creative imperatives are at the top of the priority list, go with an independent artist and don't let the decision (to shoot digitally or on film) get in the way of getting a great end product.

"I have a digital camera that takes great pictures. Why is the "professional stuff" so expensive?"
Two words - resolution and color. While some consumer-level digital cameras would work for small size, medium quality print purposes, they simply don't capture as sharp and rich an image as a true professional-quality digital camera can.

"I need digital files to do what I have to do. Don't I have to shoot digitally?"
No. Film can be either drum scanned or scanned to Kodak Photo CD, depending on the demands and budget imperatives af a particular project.

"You don't have any links to samples on this page. Why not?" State-of-the-art digital photography has out-stripped the computer screen's ability to show just how good they really are. If you would like some printed samples of digital photography, just contact me and I will be happy to send some along.

IN CONCLUSION:

I hope that this primer has proven informative and helpful, although there is a lot more to be said and learned about digital photography. Two highly regarded books on the subject are "Essentials of Digital Photography" and "The New Media Guide to Creative Photography: Image Capture and Printing in the Digital Age". I would like to include links to other pages, but have found that they change to frequently. I would suggest a keyword search of "digital photography" +tutorial. To sum up, I would just like to say that although digital photography has changed the face of commercial photography forever, that it is not a panacea, and comes with its own set of limitations. Look at it as a great tool for accomplishing certain goals, and know that it will be a while before film is obsolete.

GLOSSARY:

Digital Photography - The process of translating light patterns focussed by a lens onto a photosensitive surface which translates these patterns of light and color into a computer file. These files can be manipulated in the computer and output in a variety of media.

Direct-to-Digital Capture - See "Digital Photography"

Drum Scans - Digital files produced by a drum scanner. This is a device upon which film is placed on a rotating drum and analyzed by a sensor moving along a single axis. These scans can be produced from prints or transparencies of almost any size. Drum scanning a negative is not recommended. A drum scan produced from a transparency produces what is considered by most to be the best digital file available.

Film - Any photosensitive material which, when exposed to light patterns focussed by a lens and subjected to processing, renders a negative or positive image of those patterns. In short, what you load into your Brownie.

Graphic Artist - For the purposes of this discussion, a professional who specializes in design, layout and production of advertising art.

Kodak Photo CD Scan - A digital file produced using Kodak's scanning technology. These scans can be produced from 35mm, 120mm, and 4x5 inch transparencies or negatives and are slightly inferior to drum scans except when negative film is to be scanned. In this case, the Kodak Pro Photo CD format renders better results. For comprehensive information regarding the Kodak Photo CD and how best to utilize images from it, to to www.aols.com/colorite/optimizing.html

Lab - Short for laboratory. A facility for processing of exposed films and preparation of prints, etc. from those films. Most modern labs offer a wide range of digital imaging services.

Negative - A piece of film which, when viewed with light passing through it, shows colors and shades in a reversed or "negative" appearance. Film of this type is generally best for producing color prints.

Offset Printing - A catch-all phrase for the numerous steps involved in the process of reproducing a transparency, print, or digital file on plain paper. This is the preferred process for high-volume production of brochures, magazines, product packaging, etc.

On Color - Faithfully reproducing the color of the object photographed. Owing to a number of factors, this is not always as easy to achieve as one might think.

Output - Translation of a digital file into a medium which can be viewed by the naked eye. These media include photographic prints and transparencies, offset printing, and computer or television monitors.

Photosensitive - reactive to light.

Pixels - The dots of various hue and shade that make up a computerized image. Roughly analogous to tiles in a mosaic. The more pixels per inch, the sharper an image will appear. Also see "resolution".

Polaroids - A brand of film-chemistry combination that produces a print within seconds of exposure. Used by professional photographers primarily as a pre-visualization tool.

Prints - Opaque reproductions of images from negatives, transparencies, or digital files. Simply put, the pictures you would frame or put in a photo album.

Processing - The treatment of exposed photosensitive materials to a series of chemicals for the purpose of bringing forth a visible image from the latent image on the film. This is done in the lab.

Resolution - The number of pixels, or dots per inch, that comprise an image. Resolution affects the appearance of "sharpness" of an image and by extension how much it can be enlarged. The higher the resolution, the sharper the image and the bigger it can be printed without out-of-focus, or "fuzzy".

Scanning - The process of electronically analyzing a piece of processed film for the purpose of creating a binary file. The resulting file can be digitally altered prior to output.

Transparency - A piece of film which, when viewed with light passing through it, shows colors and shades in their "positive" , or true, appearance. It is generally the medium of choice when photographing for 4-color offset printing. The most familiar form of the transparency is the 35mm slide.