[throw46365]

It’s more perfect than digital.

Consider this about the original slide: it was physically there with the photographer when the photograph was taken.

It is stained with the chemically-captured energy of the actual light that bounced off the subject, in a form that you can visualise with your naked eye.

If that is not perfect I don’t know what is.

(Yeah, the dynamic range sucks compared to digital. But then some digital cameras suck compared to others)

[surfingdino]

Slides have three-dimensional form and feel, because light doesn't just pass through the layers of emulsion, it bounces inside. This is also what made dye-transfer prints look so good. Sadly, that print technology is no more.

[throw46365]

I shoot digital, and only black and white film, these days.

(I need to build a darkroom so I can print again)

But the thing that really hooked me deep into photography was 6x6 transparencies from a Rolleicord. Velvia, incident light meter, sunny day, job done.

Downvotes on my earlier comment suggest that people haven't had this experience: no matter how great, practical and useful digital is, there is something mesmerising and emotional about a great transparency.

These days I get my visceral buzz from assembling my own simple lenses.

[surfingdino]

Try 8x10 transparencies. You will be hooked.

[throw46365]

One day... building a 4x5 is next.