You may have noticed that the standard prints you will receive are a larger, 5x7-inch size instead of the 3˝x5 or 4x6 size offered by others. There are two reasons for this: first, the 5x7 print is a step up from the drug-store and 1-hour-lab sizes, and you deserve that quality for your wedding. It's large enough to border with a mat and frame and put on a wall, which with only a 1˝-inch mat and ˝-inch frame (although the mat and frame could be much wider) you have a piece of wall art that's 9x11 inches, and you get two sets, standard, without having to pay extra for enlargements! Or, with a standing frame, you have a really nice picture size that's suitable for desk, credenza, piano, or mantle. And, although the album you'll get also holds the 5x7s you'll receive, an album is all the others' 3˝x5 or 4x6 size is really good for, isn't it? The other reason is that the medium-format equipment and films used to capture your memories justifies the larger base-print size. So think about your wall space when you view your favorite standard-package prints.
Photography for weddings is now available in three flavors: 35mm film, digital (small and 35mm-sized capture CCDs), and medium-format film. It's obvious that medium format is superior to 35mm or digital because the lenses are better and the film is larger, and larger film yields sharper, better pictures. Medium-format-film cameras in 645 (6x4.5cm—2˝-times larger than 35mm film or FX-digital-CCD size, and 4-times the size of the DX/APS-digital-CCD sensors used by 95-percent of all pro digital cameras) will be used for your ceremony and portraits because, unlike many photographers who have switched to pure digital would have you believe, the medium-format negative definitely translates into a sharper, more detailed image, especially in enlargements. The latest professional digital cameras have only reached 14.2 megapixels, and they need to get to 25 megapixels just to match the best 35mm film—maybe another three to five years, and medium format will still be the choice for big enlargements; so, don't let your wedding be run over by the rush to new technologies.
Most digital cameras are best for news, sports, catalogs, and family or hobby pictures for prints in drugstore sizes; their quality has gotten good enough for the professional applications in those fields. Professional digital cameras are also suitable for 8˝x11 prints, and the advantages they offer over film for those fields and some aspects of weddings and portraiture where higher-sized enlargements will not be needed are instant gratification and not having to reload film, a film task that is usually very poorly timed with what's happening. And, contrary to the initial thought, saving of film and processing costs (which are all included in the very competetive package prices here) are not an advantzge for digital, partly because any change to digital, complete or partial, involves a significant increase in post-event work with managing, editing, and producing the images, most of which is not a factor in film production for the photographer, and all of which, in time and equipment, more than offsets any savings over cost of film and processing. Also, most photographers still pay for processing of prints, whether they do it in-house or through a film or digital lab. The fact is, from a post-event-production point of view, time and costs, film is easier and less expensive. While it's true that digital imaging has come a long way and is advancing quickly, it hasn't met the quality or capability of professional medium-format films and equipment, and film improvement has not been standing still in the wake of digital advances, either. Digital also has operational and safety limitations film does not have. The digital-image memory-storage device is not immune from failure or electro-static damage—digital cameras are much more complex than film, and the risk of loss of images before the photographer gets back to the studio to upload them and make backups (assuming backups are dutifully made) is not even a consideration with film.
In medium-format film, another advantage comes into play when custom prints are ordered and are cropped, which is where portions of the negative (or digital CCD) are not used, putting a greater demand on the remaining image area in producing prints or Web images. The large 645 negative makes it possible to isolate and enlarge (crop) smaller sections of an image for use on the Web and in prints that look as good as full-frame 35mm or digital would look if that segment filled the entire negative or frame in those formats. So, if that picture of Aunt Aline in the group shot looks so great that you want to make a cropped portrait of her alone for an enlargement or the Web, the 645 medium-format negative will produce a result with which digital and 35mm just can't begin to compete.
Another disadvantageous factor affecting digital is that because digital imagery does not have nearly the latitude of acceptable exposure that film of any size has (although the digital SLR that will be used in your event has come closer than any other, close enough to bring into the mix) the standard procedure is for the digital photographer to try and check each picture taken, on the spot, using a difficult-to-see LCD screen, which distracts from you, and the events, and the planning and moving for the next shot. Better latitude also means that film and the digital used by Silkstrand captures more of the details in the whole range of visible light than digital can, from the wedding extremes of the whites of your wedding dress to the blacks of his tuxedo. And, finally (whew!), film cameras do not require the photographer to wait for previously-taken digital images to store into memory before another shot can be fired off, a real problem for a photographer not using the latest, very expensive models of digital cameras, like the one selected for Silkstrand weddings, which have solved that problem, and I can't tell you how many times I've taken one shot to then immediately see a different, better expression or posture in the action that causes me to snap another right off—if not using film, or a late-model digital with fast memory card, that's a probable lost shot.
Medium-format, 35mm, and digital systems all allow the same type of photography to be done of your wedding, from formal and environmental portraits to candids, but if you will be ordering enlargements beyond the proof-print size you'll receive, you will be very well pleased with the medium-format result. Silkstrand finally put one foot into the digital world with the late 2007 release of a new camera produced by two leading manufacturers, melding the best of their individual expertise, and digital will now be used for pre- and post-ceremony candids, reception, and in combination with medium-format film in the ceremony and portrait coverages. The augmented, digital part of your coverage will be with a professional, digital-SLR camera that incorporates Fujifilm image capture with a Nikon pro-camera body, to deliver the greatest latitude (light-to-dark recording ability) and most pleasing color available in digital today. And remember, the use of medium-format film in your ceremony and for portraits doesn't mean the conveniences of digital format are denied to you in those cases. Aside from augmented digital SLR coverage, our packages include raw digital scanning of the medium-format film onto CD, so you get the best of both worlds without the risks and disadvantages of just the one.
So, in other words, medium-format film gives unmatched enlargement quality, has greater exposure latitude, safety, versatility, and it allows you to get more out of any part of the image taken than either 35mm film or digital, and your most important shots will be covered by both. Within a decade, digital will have closed the gaps and film will be relegated to special-purpose use, fanatics, and diehards, but for now, and a few years hence, this is a true story.
Mitzvahs 