A rant on the term Analog when relating to shooting Film
There is a recent trend to refer to shooting film as analog and I’m sure this is due to the image capture device which is a physical emulsion of silver halide. There is nothing digital about an old mechanical camera filled with your favorite emulsion. So what does this have to do with digital cameras?
First off, the CCD sensor that most digital SLRs use to record the light, is an analog circuit; there is nothing digital about the component. This is not the case for CMOS sensors which could be either an analog or digital circuit. (This is the actual imaging sensor and not the components that work with the sensor)
Why does this bug me?
I think it bugs me because no one bothered to think about what is actually recording the light, granted there may be digital circuitry behind the sensor to process the data, but the fact is the device that gathers light is analog in one of the 2 types of sensors used in digital cameras. I don’t believe film is an analog process, it’s an everlasting chemical process, from creating the emulsion, to shooting, to developing. The only chemical process used in the creation of a digital camera is the etching of the copper off of the circuit boards, which really doesn’t create something tangible as it’s removing most of the copper to create traces for various components.
I guess I’m a little jaded because I grew up with film cameras and today there is a generation of children who have no idea film exists. There are people converting from digital to film (how odd is that) and I think this is where the analog term came about; most likely some trendy kid or online magazine/blog coined the term and everybody latched on.
Respect the chemical process, call it by what it is, film.
As an aside, I’m tired of seeing the Dell/Verizon commercial for their collaborative netbook, that damn “Lollipop” song is pissing me off.






