Hi everyone, I'm fairly new to photography, especially

>>2912413
Stuck/sticky appreture blade?

>>2912413
>analog photography.
NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.
It's film, not analog, you fucking cocksucker!
KYS millennial faggot

>>2912429
I'm not op but it is analog by definition.

>>2912562
Fun fact: film photography is more digital than digital.

>>2912429
i tip my fedora to you m'sir

We can't talk about analog on the internet, because the moment you post a digitized picture, then you made it digital.

Its film.

>>2912574
fun fact: no it isn't

>>2912580
No, >>2912574 is right.
Silver halid doesn't halfway react. It's an all or nothing thing -- mutually exclusive binary states, you know the reason "di" is at the beginning of digital? From capture down, it's a binary process. "digital" photography isn't uniformly an digital process though (what is it that ADC stands for again?).

>>2912583
Seriously it is. Actually look into the science of how photography works mate and realize that digital, at it's most technical refers to systems based off of binary states.

>>2912586

lmfao you're talking out of your ass mate

>>2912596
Not in the least, but you're welcome to try to disprove me. It'll be amusing because you literally can't. Sensors in "digital" cameras are analog sensors. Silver halide either reacts or it doesn't.

>>2912599
>Chemistry is more digital than sensors, you can't prove me wrong

We understand what you are trying to say. Everyone just thinks it's a dumb argument over semantics.

>>2912659
>We understand what you are trying to say.
Obviously not. Also calling it "analogue" is just an overcorrection attempt at trying to appear intelligent, much like how people misuse "utilize" in an attempt to sound more formal, more intelligent. It's film photography. The medium is film. It's not analogue in any sense of the word beyond the vacuous "it's old". There's no continuum involved at any point.

>>2912664
I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as film, is in fact, silver/halide, or as I've recently taken to calling it, silver plus halide. film is not an emulsion unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning halide system made useful by silver bromide, chloride and iodide comprising a full emulsion

File: eyJ1cmwiOiJodHRwOi8vc3RhdGljLnBob3RvLm5ldC9hdHRhY2htZW50cy9iYm9hcmQvMDBkLzAwZHNvNS01NjIzODQ4ODQuanBnIn0.FdRIHxT-PnI4ENpRnTFmLiPGi88.jpg (109KB, 528x700px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 528x700px

OP take a picture of your shutter curtain if you can. Seems to me like it could be damaged as that is usually what leaves that kind of mark

What camera is it?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	by.blooddy.crypto.image.JPEGEncoder
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	528
Image Height	700

>>2912676
Fair enough. That said the information recording is whether or not the reaction between the constituent chemicals has taken place.

>>2912599
>Sensors in "digital" cameras are analog sensors

they're just a transducer in a much larger system kys

>>2912761
How is repeating what was already said an argument?

>>2912763

by your logic any semiconductor device is analog since it implements an analog application in this case CMOS CCD etc

just stop

>>2912676
Well played.

>>2912782
I'm glad someone got it because that guy sure didn't

>>2912773
I love how you're playing like it's a matter of opinion. The terms are clearly defined. If you're dealing with a system that can deal with continuous information at the basic levels, it's at least partially analog. One of the largest historical challenges in electronics is digitizing analog inputs. Digital cameras are hybrids of digital and analog systems. Film cameras are purely digital. The reaction takes place or it doesn't. There's a dot of black or there's not. There's not variable levels of brightness that are captured by the same sensing element.