|
masocko
Nov 9, 2008, 9:13 PM
Post #1 of 14
(3424 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2008
Posts: 4
|
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've heard, tried, and tested all things digital, but there is something about the classic film. Much like the polaroid, classic film has it's own uniqueness to it. Giving warmth, imperfection, and sometimes odd qualities to it's very nature. In an ever changing world of photography and technology they seem to compliment one another very well, however it is in the basics that we can find the most beauty. Post your classics here. I have some on the way.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Nov 9, 2008, 9:29 PM
Post #2 of 14
(3410 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
masocko wrote: Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've heard, tried, and tested all things digital, but there is something about the classic film. Much like the polaroid, classic film has it's own uniqueness to it. Giving warmth, imperfection, and sometimes odd qualities to it's very nature. In an ever changing world of photography and technology they seem to compliment one another very well, however it is in the basics that we can find the most beauty. Post your classics here. I have some on the way.
I like film, but I haven't shot any in a while.
I have 18 rolls of Provia 100F in the freezer that will be shot, but I am currently scanning 10 years of film, which is probably over 500GB of high res scans (I scan everything in batches then delete!!) Should take about a year to get it done. I'd guess about 1000 rolls of film.
So shooting more film is not appealing right now.
Oddly, I have a similar backlog of RAW files on my hard drive over the past 6 months.
Digital workflow is slightly easier but not A LOT easier. It trades RAW conversion for scanning.
As far as film having a unique quality, it does.
There have been several major awards in the last few years that went to photos taken with film because they didn't look fake and over processed, and TOO sharp like digital files do. Noiseless digital files are appealing but they all look the same, film grain had unique characteristics, so much so that there are programs to create grain in digital files.
Also, digital until recently only had a few "films" in that there were just a few sensor makers...chiefly Canon and Sony. So most photos had the same look unless they were significantly post processed.
I've actually seen quite a few people start in digital and move to film recently. Not completely shoot film, but be intrigued by it's properties, and the process of film vs. digital. I hope, and think film will be around for a while, but it is going to get pricey, and harder to find. It will be the equivalent of painting, you can buy the supplies but it's not going to be a mainstream hobby.
But then I've been saying still photography, film or digital, is going to be gone within 5 years. Sad but true. HD video capture will reach a point where we will simply pull high res stills from video. Be a sad day for me, but when the professional news media is already doing it for a few years, it seems like it's inevitable!
|
|
|
|
|
masocko
Nov 10, 2008, 4:02 PM
Post #3 of 14
(3357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2008
Posts: 4
|
Awesome to hear from you. I thought that I was the only one out there. I totally see what you are saying about film slowly being phased out, and it breaks my heart.
I would love to see some of your work, sounds like you have been busy as of late scanning and converting. Hope all goes well, and like i said before, I will be posting some classics of my own, I just have to scan them all in. Till next time.
|
|
|
|
|
chanceboarder
Nov 10, 2008, 5:47 PM
Post #4 of 14
(3336 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1348
|
I'm still shooting some film. Not nearly as much as I used to but I still bring my old Mamiya 645E out on photo trips and put a few rolls through it every now and then. I'd love to get a 4x5 system despite it's weight and bulkiness. The quality and detail of the shots you can get with one of those is outstanding. But to be honest I haven't shot 35mm film since picking up a DSLR. I've got an F100 and an F4 sitting at home that hasn't seen any action in a long time.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Nov 11, 2008, 10:27 AM
Post #5 of 14
(3297 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
chanceboarder wrote: I'm still shooting some film. Not nearly as much as I used to but I still bring my old Mamiya 645E out on photo trips and put a few rolls through it every now and then. I'd love to get a 4x5 system despite it's weight and bulkiness. The quality and detail of the shots you can get with one of those is outstanding. But to be honest I haven't shot 35mm film since picking up a DSLR. I've got an F100 and an F4 sitting at home that hasn't seen any action in a long time.
I'd offer to buy the F100 but as little film as I shoot, my film rigs would be crusty enough. Great camera though. IMO, probably the best all around Nikon before the F6. Smallish, rugged, decent interface. Upgradeable. The F4 is a tank but nearly indestructible.
Yeah, I do have a little desire to still get a medium format system. Some will say a Canon 1DsMIII is better (and head to head they are close) but for $800 I can walk out of a store with a used 645N and a few nice lenses. The other $7200 buys a lot of film and processing!!!!
Too many other needs, plus a few wants in front of that though. Really, when you put 35mm Provia 100F on a tripod, use a good lens, and use the mirror lockup, you are still getting a super high quality, hi-res image. But 645 or 67 slides are awesome to look at!!
|
|
|
|
|
wes_allen
Nov 11, 2008, 6:53 PM
Post #6 of 14
(3274 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2002
Posts: 549
|
Have thought about picking up a cheap film body for some IR film, just a roll here and there for wedding and stuff. You can convert a dslr, but you can buy a film slr and a whole lot of film for the price, esp. for such a specialized use.
My wife really wants a medium format system, but I think we are going to wait until we have a place for a dark room first. She is fully into that process, but I will be sticking with my mac, ACD, and photoshop until the digital backs come down enough to be affordable.
|
|
|
|
|
chanceboarder
Nov 11, 2008, 10:40 PM
Post #7 of 14
(3262 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1348
|
wes_allen wrote: Have thought about picking up a cheap film body for some IR film, just a roll here and there for wedding and stuff. You can convert a dslr, but you can buy a film slr and a whole lot of film for the price, esp. for such a specialized use. My wife really wants a medium format system, but I think we are going to wait until we have a place for a dark room first. She is fully into that process, but I will be sticking with my mac, ACD, and photoshop until the digital backs come down enough to be affordable.
As for my medium format I develop my own slides at home. All you need is a tank, reel, some chemicals, and a bitch black place to load the film. That's probably the only reason why I still shoot with it on occasion. Chemicals in bulk are pretty cheap when compared to the cost of the per roll development at a lab. I just wish I had a good scanner that could handle the film. I'm still taking frames into my lab to get scanned on their drum scanner if I want it in digital format.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Nov 12, 2008, 12:04 AM
Post #8 of 14
(3239 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
I love my 25 years old Canon A1 and I bet after taken over 6000 slides round the world, it still takes better photos than thye best digital SLR.
|
|
|
|
|
dockzilla
Nov 12, 2008, 1:11 AM
Post #9 of 14
(3229 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 25, 2005
Posts: 24
|
Hey there I am using an 80's model pentax 35mm and does anybody have any suggestions for either a filter of a lens I should try to find to help me out? This is the kind of shot that I am trying to make better.
|
|
Attachments:
|
John.pic
(141 KB)
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Nov 12, 2008, 3:17 AM
Post #10 of 14
(3208 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
I considered having my F3 sent out to play with IR film, but then never bothered. I don't think I'd even bother to convert a digital to IR since I'd rather just have a second body.
I've only tried to mimic the effect in Photoshop once (from a low res file unfortunately, without massive success. To be honest, I think I'd rather bend the same Photoshop concepts into something a little different instead of chasing after something I could get with a true IR sensor/ film.
I miss spending time in the darkroom, but given that I spend five to six days a week behind a camera shooting product, I have to say that I'm damn grateful for digital work flow and for the progress that has been made in recent years. I know when I was still in school there were times when I had to switch back to film because neither the D1X nor Phase One H 5 could cope with certain situations and the only way to shoot true large format was with stitching... so still life only.
I've fallen a bit behind on current printing technologies since I hardly ever print my own work anymore, but digital enlargers were also lovely addition to most labs to restore a bit more of that emulsion-y goodness to digital images. For a while it seemed hard to get a good Dmax on inkjet; I'd assume standards have gotten better over the past little while.
Still, I can't deny a certain lingering romanticism towards film...
(This post was edited by kriso9tails on Nov 12, 2008, 3:18 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
JoshCaple
Nov 13, 2008, 4:14 PM
Post #11 of 14
(3165 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2008
Posts: 43
|
I still have an F4s & F80, plus some older bodies like the Canon AE-1 & Minolta X-9?, various polaroid & lomo cameras and a pinhole. I'm also looking at getting a Bronny or Mayima medium format (I love playing with them) and a rangefinder.
I have yet to shoot film for a client (though I have about 8000 slides in my stock library & often pull out a scanner for stock requests!) but I still shoot a lot of film for my self, a mixture of 35mm & med. format, e6, c41, traditional (processed in my bathroom, and occasionally I still print in a darkroom)
It's not how I choose to do business but for personal work there's something magic about the whole film experience that will never die.
|
|
|
|
|
atlnq9
Nov 30, 2008, 4:05 AM
Post #12 of 14
(2969 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2007
Posts: 111
|
Medium format rangefinder (6x7) all the way!
Use to own canon 1v and 4 L series lenses. But I kind of stopped shooting action and close-ups.
Digital is no competition with that yet unless you have a money tree or carry a massive heavy battery sucking camera...
I figure once I can get a nice light 16 megapixel digital slr that weighs the same as my rangefinder and cost less than a thousand (besides lenses) I'll switch. What would make it more appealing is a rangefinder style like the sigma or leica, nice compact and high quality.
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Nov 30, 2008, 8:41 AM
Post #13 of 14
(2947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
So... you're not going digital for at least a decade then? Leica has the M8, but that's far from 16MP and $1000.
I always appreciate more pixels to work with so long as they don't come at the cost of other image quality set backs, but if I ever truly needed to push resolution that far then it'd probably be work related and in that case I'd be billing extra for the rental of one of the mid-range Phase P+ series backs. Heard the P65+ is 60MP... and probably something like $40,000 - $50,000. I'll have to see how much I have in my penny jar.
|
|
|
|
|
atlnq9
Nov 30, 2008, 7:20 PM
Post #14 of 14
(2922 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2007
Posts: 111
|
Nah, I figure it will only be 6-8 years, and if it is made by leica I would go to 5,000, just sell my spare car. Probably more by the time inflatrion comes around :(. The 1,000 was for an slr.
I think the rangefinder format really is much more enjoyable to shoot. It really makes you focus on the image more, you can't just fire away images (everyone has to be good when you can only get 10 images per roll)
P.S. I think film will be around for a little while. Fuji is coming out with a new folding 6x7 rangefinder! They can't stop making film when they release a brand new camera to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
