Film!

[aam1234]

Do you have the itch to shoot film sometimes.
Been having this desire to use film for few months, especially B&W.

So do you think of using film once in a while.

[David1943]

I haven't shot any film for over a year and doubt whether I will now, despite the fact I've still got my Canon EOS600.

It may be different if I'd a darkroom in which case I just might be tempted to shoot B&W occasionally but, as I haven't, I feel I've so much more control over digital images and don't want to go to all the expense and trouble of processing film and enlarging pictures.

David :)

[aam1234]

Hi David,

I meant like once in a blue moon not on a regular basis.

Btw, I've never heard of EOS600. I thought the first EOS was 650 (which was the first SLR I've bought).

Edit: corrected the no. of the first EOS produced. Hope I'm right.

[ElleG83]

yes i do! althought, being in school, i have access to a lab where i can develop all my film and print it all. of course i think sometimes that i forget how frustrating it can be to develop b&w film. i used to spend hours in there and never fully be satisfied with my results. but i still love it. nothing like putting your paper in the developer and watching your image appear.

[aam1234]

I know the feeling Elle. It's like magic.

Been developing B&W at home when I was 12 or 13.

[jfrancho]

Yes I do. But I'd like to get a nice rangefinder. And a couple of lenses. I do shhot MF film with a Holga sometimes, but that really is a novelty for me.

[ElleG83]

I do shhot MF film with a Holga sometimes, but that really is a novelty for me.
i've been thinking of getting a "holgaroid" camera. my friend tells me they are a lot of fun and he has some nice work he's done with them. know of any good place to get them from.

[aam1234]

Of course Bloo Dog.

We are talking about trying film once in a while. The sound of the shutter is like music. The winding or rewinding of the film gives that satisfying feeling... those kind of things.

[ElleG83]

They're advertised in Amphoto, and i believe that Freestyle in LA sells the Holgaroid.
sweet! thanks!:D

[David1943]

Hi David,

I meant like once in a blue moon not on a regular basis.

Btw, I've never heard of EOS600. I thought the first EOS was 650 (which was the first SLR I've bought).

Edit: corrected the no. of the first EOS produced. Hope I'm right.
Hello,

Yes, definitely a Canon EOS600 and very well built indeed. I can only assume that you live in the USA and, as with the 300D / Rebel, it was called something else when sold in America.

Regards, David :)

[aam1234]

Opps, double post.

[aam1234]

Hi David again,

I don't live in the US, but I bought that 650 when it first came out in the US (I was studying there at the time). So what was the first EOS?

[Curtis N]

I haven't shot a single frame of film since the day I got my DRebel.
Haven't rode a horse to work or used a slide rule lately, either. My typewriter is also gathering dust.:)

Oops... I take that back. I bought a single-use 35mm camera for when I went parasailing. I didn't think that would be a safe place for the DRebel.

[aam1234]

OK guys, make fun, but film is still cool...somewhat.

[DwightMcCann]

OK, I'm going to sell my F100 and all the rest of my Nikon gear ...

[lostdoggy]

I would shoot BW but don't have Darkroom anymore nor do I have the urge to inhale the fumes.

[skyphix]

I shoot film - just the standard C-41 processing stuff (B&W). Luckily, one of the shops around here has a printer they use ONLY for C-41 black and white film, which prevents the "hue issues" that come along with black and white prints off of a printer that is used for color.

Well, I guess I WOULD shoot film if I could ever get my 50mm 1.8 off of my 300D. I dont really like the length of my 70-210 for daily shooting on my 300D, let along on the film camera. It will change once I get the 24 2.8 :)

[KevC]

Hi David again,

I don't live in the US, but I bought that 650 when it first came out in the US (I was studying there at the time). So what was the first EOS?

EOS650 was introduced in March 1987.

Canon's first EOS camera had the latest technologies including a super microcomputer and a Canon-developed BASIS sensor for high-precision AF. The EOS 650 boasted incomparable autofocusing. Each EF lens has its own optimum built-in motor for autofocusing, and only electronic signals are exchanged between the lens and camera body. It is an ideal AF system. Since there is no high-torque driving noise, autofocusing is quick. The high-precision Ultrasonic Motor (USM) was also developed successfully. EOS was the start of a new and unique series of AF SLR cameras.

EOS600 was introduced in April 1989.


This camera is a notch above the EOS 620 with faster AF speed. Like the EOS 620, the 630 QD has autobracketing up to ±5 stops (1/2-stop increments), maximum of 9 multiple exposures, 6-zone evaluative metering, and 6.5% partial metering at the center.

In the AI Servo AF mode, the maximum shooting speed is 2.5 fps. In the One-Shot AF mode, the maximum is 5 fps. The body came in black or metallic gray. The price was the same for both colors.


Lotsa great info here:


http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/f_camera.html


http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/


I have my father's old EOS650, still haven't put a roll through yet. I dunno what I'm waiting for...

[Curtis N]

OK guys, make fun, but film is still cool...somewhat.Yep. Horses are cool, too. Beautiful animals. Great to have if you can afford them.

Honestly, the biggest reason I went digital is because I'm a crappy photographer. I still take plenty of crappy shots, I just don't print them. For the seasoned veterans who actually know what they're doing, I'm sure film has its place.

[DocFrankenstein]

I've started to shoot lots of film recently. The cameras and lenses are cheaper and better. The BW film gives you better quality than the 6mp cameras and I compose the pictures more carefully. I feel that film is bringing something new into my photography.

Digital was a very nice place to learn the basics though. I think I'll come back to it after I'm tired of shooting film, but I'll bring stronger composition skills and won't need as many memory cards as I do now. :)

[iharding160]

I dusted off my Praktica LTL the other week and ran a roll of film through it. Normally I use a Canon A95, which is a great camera, but I wanted to take some pictures of a band on stage during a performance and the low-light abilities of the A95 just aren't up to it.

Something very satisfying about the rock-solid, postive, simple operation of an old manual SLR. I'll probably use it a bit more now, mainly with B+W film, develop at home then scan. At least until I can afford a 20D with a 70-200 zoom ;-)

[EOSAddict]

I haven't shot a single frame of film since the day I got my DRebel.


Me neither. Althought I do miss my EOS 100 still (sat in the cupboard until I can summon up the will to Ebay it - maybe I'll just keep it - just in case!!)

Have to say though, digital has re-awakenewd my interest in photography - I take more (not necessarily better!) and different pics than when it would cost me about 30 per slide!! (although if I add up the money spent on DReb, lens, new PC etc etc its probably more!)

[aam1234]

I shoot film - just the standard C-41 processing stuff (B&W). Luckily, one of the shops around here has a printer they use ONLY for C-41 black and white film, which prevents the "hue issues" that come along with black and white prints off of a printer that is used for color.


That's an interesting point skyphix. Didn't know that regular printers have a hue when printing B&W. Does this apply to all printers or particular ones. Just printed a B&W recently on a Fuji Frontier and it looks normal to me.

[robertwgross]

I keep a few rolls of Velvia, Provia, and Elite Chrome in the refrigerator for those rare occasions when I get my film camera to someplace like Death Valley and the sunset becomes dramatic.

It still kind of makes chills run up and down my back.

---Bob Gross---

[aam1234]

Could you guys recommend a B&W film. Not sure that we have a lot of variety of them here, but I think I have a better chance with Kodak.

Thanks

[DocFrankenstein]

Could you guys recommend a B&W film. Not sure that we have a lot of variety of them here, but I think I have a better chance with Kodak
What are you looking for in BW film?

I was looking for cheap, so I shoot german agfa film and paper and process it myself. Results are fine.

[Ausdig]

Since I purchased my digital I haven't touched a roll of film. The transition from film, EOS500 to digital, 300D was seamless.

Since puchasing my digital camera in September last year I've taken several thousand photos and printed out a couple of hundred. About the same as if I was still using film.

The difference is that every picture printed since the change is one I want to keep and have looked at long and hard. I beleive I've become a better photo since the change and am now able to enjoy my hobby a lot more.

[ducdubbq]

I have a 20d but i have a whole series of film cameras and lenses.

and i think aam1234 is completely right. the darkroom is, well, dark, and stinky but there is a magic to all the chemical work. nothing was there once and now somethign is there.

so i got rolls (100 foot rolls) of tech pan, tri-x, neopan, apx100 to go through . i also have 10 rolls of supra 400 (which digital has certainly replaced, though the film was great) and

gasp of gasps!

kodachrome 64 and 25.


my digital is great for stuff i want to share immediately. mom's birthday, take the photos burn them that night, send to to the fam.

but film, esp black and white which i can do myself and then print myself rather than having to fiddle with photoshop, my printer, the CVS printer and all this other technical hassels (my sony printer can't print good greens, don't know why but they come out day-glo yellow half the time)

and I can look at film negatives or slides in a way i can't look at a screen and appreciate the photo. i shoot a whole lot more digital, but the photos stay with me less.

[Kennymc]

Do you have the itch to shoot film sometimes.
Been having this desire to use film for few months, especially B&W.

So do you think of using film once in a while.

Yes still use a film camera along side my digitals to make a living...

[Hellashot]

Yes I do, since I just bought an EOS-3 a few weeks ago and my Drebel is in the shop because the mirror stopped working. So all I have is film and my compact F10. I wish i had learned film first though. Photography is too simple when starting digital. I do like all the advanced features compared to the stripped down Drebel - even with hacked firmware. Yesterday I shot my first 12mm shot with my Sigma 12-24 and couldn't believe how wide and how close I could get to this tree! A big difference than on these small sensor dSLRs! The inability to change ISOs without greatly degrading the picture quality is hampering on film though.

My first photo with my EOS-3 was a mistake. I couldn't believe how sensitive and lagless the shutter button is. I was just trying to get the info in the viewfinder and it took an image. The DOF preview button is hard to get used to on my EOS-3 compared to my Drebel. It's nice to have a speedy camera compared to the stiff button and lag on the Drebel. I think my EOS-3 will get a lot of use when I go to the U.S. Senior Open (golf) in a few weeks to get shots my Drbebel would be storing images on because of how slow - that's IF it's even back from the Canon shop by then. Been over a week and no email from them yet.

[PhotosGuy]

I haven't shot a single frame of film since the day I got my DRebel.
Haven't rode a horse to work or used a slide rule lately, either. My typewriter is also gathering dust. :D:D Me either in the last 1-1/2 years! But that doesn't mean that I wouldn't if I had to.

If you have the urge, then try it. I'm sure that you'll have fun & learn a lot. The range of colors in slides is unbelievable, & grain can be a great tool. It looks nothing like you get out of PS. But after 30 years in the darkroom, I'm glad to stay out of one. ;)


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/Samples%20-%20General/Seagull-blur_01.jpghttp://photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/Samples%20-%20General/?

[hedphonz]

there are times when i am only shooting in black and white with film. just cause i can never get the black and white levels just right on my digital. though many people would say how easy it is to just have the levels and everything else, though to me, it still doesn't look as good as it does on the paper. i bought a EOS 10QD used for $100 and i love it. it does everything i could ever want in a film camera. just cause i mainly just use the 300D.

[Bruce Hamilton]

If I ever get another urge to shoot film, my brother's Minolta XG is sitting unused. ;)

[UncleDoug]

I keep a few rolls of Velvia, Provia, and Elite Chrome in the refrigerator for those rare occasions when I get my film camera to someplace like Death Valley and the sunset becomes dramatic.

It still kind of makes chills run up and down my back.

---Bob Gross---

You got that right!

I applaud every single landscape or commercial photographer who goes COMPLETELY digital. It eliminates them from becoming any form of competition to me or my business partner.

I've seen may great digital images.
Here goes the mantra again.....
But the images from a well exposed and well composed positive can not be touched by digital.

I've had several people tell me I have my head up my south end.
But stop by my shop some time. I'll make you a believer.
Put any positive, 35, 6x, 4x5, what ever on to our Tango drum scanner and compare it to a digital image taken moments from the film version..........

Like I've said before, digital is an amazing thing. But by eliminating film from the arsenal, you are limiting yourself!

Another angle on this. Digital can make you lazy and reliant on technology as well. We had a customer come into the shop the other day. I was using a calculator to produce some quotes for him. He had the answer to the arithmatic way before my fingers coud finish tapping. I was blown away, He said he uses a calculator maybe once a month to double check things(he has a few yesrs under his belt). He also said he likes to do the arithmatic in his head because it kees him close to the concepts of math. He then went on to say that is why he still shoots film along with digital, to keep the concepts of photography fresh in his mind rather than relying upon the LCD on the back of a digital camera.
All I have to say is that from looking at his images, he is right on.

[DwightMcCann]

Damn, I'm going to sell my F100 along with all my Fuji and Nikon stuff and then won't have a film body! But now I guess I'll have to pick up a film body, too. So, what's recommended for film in the Canon line ... what's the best?

[UncleDoug]

Here is a display of how digital and film can interpret the same scene in very different ways.
First is the digital. Second is film.

[UncleDoug]

I keep a few rolls of Velvia, Provia, and Elite Chrome in the refrigerator for those rare occasions when I get my film camera to someplace like Death Valley and the sunset becomes dramatic.

It still kind of makes chills run up and down my back.

---Bob Gross---


Here's to chills from shooting in death valley this past spring.

[UncleDoug]

And here is one thing digi can not touch with a 43 foot pole!

[ssim]

I actually decided to take a couple of rolls of film at a recent outing. It was freshing in that it really makes you think before you hit the shutter. I was pleased with the results but the hassle of getting it to a lab for processing and then the wait for it makes me appreciate my digital even more.

[Kennymc]

Dwight...
EOS 1V HS is IMHO about the best 35 Canon SLR...

[DwightMcCann]

Gee, Doug, Hight Mountain says right on the home page that it is a "digital imaging studio!"

[allanc]

I've been thinking about taking my 4x5 out into the field. I haven't done that in quite a while.

[Curtis N]

And here is one thing digi can not touch with a 43 foot pole!I've seen star trails done with digital cameras before, so your contention leaves me confused. Battery life might be an limitation, but power adapters are available to make exposures of several hours possible, even in wilderness.

[Lotto]

I still have a mid-roll Kodak Elite36.100 in my Elan, the last 2CR5 battery died more than 4 years ago. Do you think that film still any good?:D

[PhotosGuy]

I still have a mid-roll Kodak Elite36.100 in my Elan, the last 2CR5 battery died more than 4 years ago. Do you think that film still any good The color balance might be a bit off & it might pick up some grain, but why not use it up & see? ;-)

[Hellashot]

Here is a display of how digital and film can interpret the same scene in very different ways.
First is the digital. Second is film.

The film looks a lot better.

[Curtis N]

Put any positive, 35, 6x, 4x5, what ever on to our Tango drum scanner and compare it to a digital image ...This is the part of the technology that confuses me some. You capture an image on film, then you run it through your drum scanner (read: make a digital image from it by using a highly specialized digital camera).

If digital imaging technology can produce those colors from negatives or slides, why can't the same technology capture those same colors initially?

Maybe I need an education about all this. I suspect that the color differences in the two images you posted only exist because of the way the film was designed and the way the digital processor was programmed. I also suspect that scanned negatives from two different types of film could be just as different. In either case, if you scan the negatives for digital printing, then you can manipulate the colors any way you like.

There will always be differences in images which arrise from how they are displayed. You can shine light through a semi-transparent image (slides), you can generate it by energizing light-emitting diodes (monitor), or you can coat white paper with colored ink (prints). Each has its capabilities and limitations.

[PhilHannah]

I love to use film occasionally..

I have a 1949 Zeiss 6x6 nettar which is great fun, no rangefinder, double exposure lock, no meter, nuttin..

And a 1965 ish Yashica J 35 mm which produces very sharp negs.

I use it when people tell me how easy photography is with a Digi...

However Ive found it getting more and more difficult to get C41 120 film processed quickly and cheaply these days..

Used to do it my self but havnt the time anymore

[soupdragon]

Uncle Doug:

Since your postings I feel I can come out of the closet now.
I just bought a second Canon A1 plus cool zoom plus winder and a bucket of velvia for the square root of bugger all.
Whilst the 350D makes "nicey wicey" images they really can't hold a candle to projected transparencies.
Words cannot express how pleased I am with my new (antique) camera.

"Batting for both sides"

[soupdragon]

Uncle Doug:

Since your postings I feel I can come out of the closet now.
I just bought a second Canon A1 plus cool zoom plus winder and a bucket of velvia for the square root of bugger all.
Whilst the 350D makes "nicey wicey" images they really can't hold a candle to projected transparencies.
Words cannot express how pleased I am with my new (antique) camera.

"Batting for both sides"

PS. Used to be a blad owner myself, you have no idea how ill I felt when I sold it.

[UncleDoug]

Gee, Doug, Hight Mountain says right on the home page that it is a "digital imaging studio!"

We had to take this approach since
1. We do not DEVELOP film.
2. The majority of what we do is post-processing, i.e. scanning, digital darkroom, large format inkjet printing.

Please post a reasonable argument rather than stirring the pot. :D

[UncleDoug]

I've seen star trails done with digital cameras before, so your contention leaves me confused. Battery life might be an limitation, but power adapters are available to make exposures of several hours possible, even in wilderness.

The only CCD's that can pull multi-hour shots with a REASONABLE ammount of noise are specially designed set-ups used for astrophotography.
That shot was from 10pm to 4 am. 6 hours.

[UncleDoug]

If digital imaging technology can produce those colors from negatives or slides, why can't the same technology capture those same colors initially?


Capture technology.

Drum scanners use PMT's (Photo Multiplier Tubes), a completely different beast from CCD's.
With a PMT based drum scanner, you can capture a broader gamut of color and larger density range than any CCD can.
Film, both positive and negative can capture more of a color gamut and density range than a drum scanner can read.

This making sense? :)

[UncleDoug]

Uncle Doug:

Since your postings I feel I can come out of the closet now.
I just bought a second Canon A1 plus cool zoom plus winder and a bucket of velvia for the square root of bugger all.
Whilst the 350D makes "nicey wicey" images they really can't hold a candle to projected transparencies.
Words cannot express how pleased I am with my new (antique) camera.

"Batting for both sides"

PS. Used to be a blad owner myself, you have no idea how ill I felt when I sold it.


Soup,

I like the "battling for both sides" tag line. And sorry to hear about the blad. Great cameras!
And I'm glad to see you are embracing both technologies.
I may come off a bit of a zealot for film, but believe me I LOVE digital photography and all it has to offer.
But I think film is getting a bad rap.
I think that it is a misnomer that digital photography is the end-all and be-all.
Someone needs to bring this to light with direct examples and experience, not just speculation.
If digital works for someone, GREAT!!!!!!!
If film works for someone, GREAT!!!!!!

The fact that you need to "come out of the closet" is what realy gets me.
You should not feel or have to feel this way at all.
If anything you are leaps ahead of alot of people because of your versatility, swiss army style!!!

Cheers!!!!
:D

[soupdragon]

Uncle Doug:

Thanks for the wise words.
Everyone has their own reasons for doing what they do.
I would not trust important life events to what I consider to be an immature technology.
My father, a photographer of some 58 years said to me recently, "all the time the sun rises you can enjoy your transparencies, hold a CF card to the light and all you get is a shadow"
How long before CD's go the same way as betamax video?

[michapma]

I definitely believe that film has a higher quality than digital. It's enough to just consider the dynamic range. So professionals, artists and many amateurs will continue to find themselves continuing to use it. I would consider it normal for a professional to come off as a zealot.

The convenience and recent improvments in quality of digital has revolutionized the market for obvious reasons. I personally can say that I got a 35mm SLR several years ago and despite my natural curiosity, I let the cost of developing film prevent me from it becoming a hobby. After moving to a compact digital for a couple of years to make snapshots, I had moved away from being anything like a photographer. The coincidence of doing a short project with a friend who has a 10D and the birth of my daughter moved me to look into photography as a hobby. Since February I've made about 5000 shots, which if I were developing even the smallest prints would already have cost as much as the 20D. I have learned more in five months than I would have in five years with my film camera, simply because I am willing to take experiment taking more shots. That's what the advent of digital SLRs are about for me, not replacing film, but making photography as a hobby far more available.

I was interested by the question about recommending B&W film, so I asked someone who is an old hand at photography. He said there isn't much choice, it's pretty much Ilford. Apparently not all BW films that are made by Ilford will have their name on the box, so I'm not sure how straight an answer this is, but they're located in Mobberley, Cheshire so if it says "Made in England" then I guess it will be Ilford.

My friend also mentioned the following about film speeds:

15 ASA or 15 DIN -> Pan F
100 ASA -> FP4
400 ASA -> HP5

Hope that helps in some way.

[DwightMcCann]

Geez, Dougy, stirring up the pot is one of my favorite things but I don't think pointing out what your website says even comes near stirring ... you are welcome to rationalize it any way that makes you comfortable. I just hope you realize that I am now having to consider a Canon film body to expose all my frozen film because of this thread, sigh, and I haven't disagreed with a single thing you've said! Gamuts, gamuts everywhere, nor any film to shoot, eh?

[d'homme]

Yea .. yea i miss my ae program.. simplicity. Stolen from car.

[skyphix]

That's an interesting point skyphix. Didn't know that regular printers have a hue when printing B&W. Does this apply to all printers or particular ones. Just printed a B&W recently on a Fuji Frontier and it looks normal to me.

I wish I could tell you what TYPES, or even the quality of the machines where Ive had problems with. I could show you an example though. I asked the photographer at the local shop why I was getting a variety of different hues to my black and white film processed using C-41 and he explained it to me that when a film printer is used for color and black and white, residue from the color is left. Whether thats true or not, Ive seen the difference between a machine only used for black and white and a machine used for both. Thinking about it, it doesnt make a whole lot of sense, but I dont know what else may cause the differences.

Image is big, sorry about that, but it was shot on B&W film.
http://non.skyphix.com/2003/March262003/ColdDesert.jpg

same camera, film, and developer, different roll.
http://non.skyphix.com/2003/March262003/BlurryCamera.jpg

Neither are correct, and the hues are different.

[jukas]

I probably do a 90/10 ratio shooting digitally primarily, however I do still love and shoot film. I love digital for the instant feedback, the convience and the quality up to 16x20ish (I only have a 10D) however there is just something about a well exposed Velvia slide that just can't be beat.

[aam1234]

Image is big, sorry about that, but it was shot on B&W film.
http://non.skyphix.com/2003/March262003/ColdDesert.jpg

same camera, film, and developer, different roll.
http://non.skyphix.com/2003/March262003/BlurryCamera.jpg

Neither are correct, and the hues are different.

Hi Eric,

The first certainly has a sepia color, but in my *untrained* eyes it doesn't have a hue to it. I'm sure I'm missing something there.

[skyphix]

It may just be my monitor(s).

If you take either photo into photoshop and do a simple black and white conversion you may see more what Im speaking of. Some come out greenish
http://non.skyphix.com/2003/March262003/TheresaCovered.jpg

Some come out sepia toned, as my first example shows.

I guess "hue" was the wrong word to use, maybe "toned" is better, or maybe Im jsut crazy!

[aam1234]

... Some come out greenish
http://non.skyphix.com/2003/March262003/TheresaCovered.jpg

Now I know what you were referring to. Why is that?

Again, I'm as novice as they come, but I don't think that's a lab's fault. Maybe a WB issue. Just guessing. Was it taken under a fluorescent light by any chance.

[DocFrankenstein]

Now I know what you were referring to. Why is that?

Again, I'm as novice as they come, but I don't think that's a lab's fault. Maybe a WB issue. Just guessing. Was it taken under a fluorescent light by any chance.
It can't be white balance issue. It's the screwy lab processing.

[skyphix]

Yeah, Ive never had whitebalance issues with film (is it even possible? I didnt think so, but I could be wrong).

Ive got a good lab now, so no more tinted prints!

[DocFrankenstein]

is it even possible?
Not with BW film

[PhotosGuy]

Yeah, Ive never had whitebalance issues with film (is it even possible? Yes, Kodak made Wratten gell filters to compensate for it, like the 80 & 81 series.

[skyphix]

I didnt figure with black and white, since its (hah) black and white.

I didnt know that there was issues with color film, but now I do!

[aam1234]

I didnt figure with black and white, since its (hah) black and white.


Yeah, I laughed at myself after I suggested WB for B&W. felt like an idiot afterwords :D

[Kennymc]

Yeah, I laughed at myself after I suggested WB for B&W. felt like an idiot afterwords :D

This statement may not be as daft as you think... White is white, either in B&W or colour, if the white balance is off the white may be a very light shade of gray... Some people say that tungsten lighting doesn't effect B&W film but it does as the tungsten light is still a warm yellowish orange and will record as the same shade of gray as that colour would... I know the difference may be extremely minimal and I might be splitting hairs but as I said before white is white...

[aam1234]

Thanks Kenny, I feel less idiot now :D

[Steve Parr]

Film?

Yeah... I think I've heard of that...

Steve

[jfrancho]

There was film on my milk, this morning. I threw it out.

[UncleDoug]

There was film on my milk, this morning. I threw it out.


If there wasn't film on your milk, there would be no...

CHEESE! :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

[ksmattfish]

Some people say that tungsten lighting doesn't effect B&W film but it does as the tungsten light is still a warm yellowish orange and will record as the same shade of gray as that colour would... I know the difference may be extremely minimal and I might be splitting hairs but as I said before white is white...

Yeah, most BW film manufacturers' websites and tech pubs address tungsten vs. daylight balance. It's subtle, and may not matter for many photogs, but for some jobs and situations it does.

[ksmattfish]

The sound of the shutter is like music. The winding or rewinding of the film gives that satisfying feeling... those kind of things.

Absolutely!!! Why will I never give up film? It's not because I think that digital won't ever be higher resolution, better dynamic range, etc... than film. It's because they'll never put a 6x6cm sensor in my Rolleiflex! I find a tremendous amount of freedom using a camera that many folks might initially perceive as limiting. Aperture, shutter, focus, and a single focal length; it's easy to make decisions when you don't have many choices. :)

Maybe they'll build a digital graphlok back for my Speed Graphic, but with all that camera, can I tote a battery too?

[jfrancho]

The sound of the shutter is like music. The winding or rewinding of the film gives that satisfying feeling... those kind of things.I changed the shutter sound on my P&S to a screaming monkey. It is very satisfying to hear "The Bear" scream when I push the button.

[aam1234]

So you don't like film John. Others do.

[PhotosGuy]

Yeah, most BW film manufacturers' websites and tech pubs address tungsten vs. daylight balance. It's subtle, and may not matter for many photogs, but for some jobs and situations it does. Subtle? Only with B&W as you said. We didn't ever worry about it, but don't try it with color film!

[jfrancho]

So you don't like film John. Others do.No, I didn't say that. That's just the "button pusher" in me coming out. I was just being silly. I love film. I really like Poloroid in particular. I had several Poloroids as a kid. I've been considering a MF camera for a while. The problem is that I'm not sure I can leave well enough alone with the pictures, but the cost of a good scanner for the transparencies is a little prohibitive. I have the Holga, for now, But honestly, I think I've run maybe 10 rolls through it. You really have to either abandon everything you know about photoography, or really consider exactly what you are trying to achieve to have any success with it. Personally, the latter has resulted in more success for me. I have aspirations to make my own prints from film some day, I suppose I should get started soon before it all disappears?

[ScottE]

I love film. I have a whole bunch of it in my freezer. The only problem is I haven't used any of it since I got my digital camera.

[ksmattfish]

I love film. Always will. But I hate the labs.

I hear you. The color film service I've been getting at "pro" labs has really deteriorated over the last 5 years. I'm fortunate enough to have my own BW darkroom, but I have to rely on the labs for color work. Recently the local pro lab allowed 3 rolls of 120 from a wedding to get light struck. I ordered my 20D the same day. Film business is down, so are lab tech wages, and the kids they are hiring these days don't know how to handle film anymore.

[chtgrubbs]

I love film. Always will.

But I hate the labs. My imagery is better than ever, not because of any improvement in my technique, but because the lab is out of the equation, except when i shoot 4x5 transparency.

BTW, scanners that can handle film aren't all that expensive. UMax makes a flatbed that sells for about $120.00 that can handle transparency film.
I'm with Bloo Dog on this. I use to process my own E6 because the only pro lab in town was so inconsistent in their color balance, I couldn't test a shot and then get the same color for the actual shoot. And the color prints I get now are much better since I can adjust the color parameters in Photoshop. I recently got an Epson 4990 scanner to start doing digital conversions of my medium and larger format work and so far have been extremely impressed by it.

[FlyingPete]

My 2 shots worth, last roll of film I shot was some Kodak ISO800 at a airshow on my EOS30, had it spare thought I might as well use it, after all it was giving me relatively fast shutters with slower lenses. Got the roll processes initially all 6x4’s, when I got them back I could not believe the noise, very little detail, nearly all grain, practically useless shots, my 2MP dodgy Sony Cybershot was producing far better shots on the day.

On the other hand a year earlier I was right in the middle of some of the most stunning scenery in the county armed with some Fuji Velvia 50 slide film, still have not found their equal with my 20D, but I have come close!

[aam1234]

Ok, can some of the film experts answer this question please. It's been bugging me for a long long time, and it's the reason I gave up on photography during the film days.

No matter what I did, the photos always come out dull, lifeless, and a major disappointment. Not talking about composition, which I lacked then...and still do, but about the results of printing at commercial labs.

What do you think.

[FlyingPete]

Chemistry
Paper
Machine maintenance
IQ of the machine operator.

I'd LOVE to hear from someone who works in a lab to give their two cents' worth here. I'd like to know the same thing.

Yeah, our cheap and nasty 1hour down the road used to keep their chemicals in forever, they also left their machine on default settings, no tunning of images, it was also full of cr*p as well, nealry all my neagtives came back scratched.

Got some of the image reprinted at a real photostore (with one of those ones with a guy who had been shooting since they made their own plates running the machine), the results from that guy - stunning.

[UncleDoug]

Yeah, our cheap and nasty 1hour down the road used to keep their chemicals in forever, they also left their machine on default settings, no tunning of images, it was also full of cr*p as well, nealry all my neagtives came back scratched.

Got some of the image reprinted at a real photostore (with one of those ones with a guy who had been shooting since they made their own plates running the machine), the results from that guy - stunning.

Pete,

You hit the nail that will continue to be hit for eternety whether it is traditional film, digital or anything.

If you want good output, you either have to shove your head in deep and figure it out for yourself.

OR

Go to a "real photostore" where people care about what they are doing, not jut looking for a paycheck.

Good consistent qualty output doesn't come as easily as the expectations of the digital camera revolution has implanted in our brains.

[PhotosGuy]

Even Kodak didn't get it right! "B&W" prints that came back from their lab in Finley, Ohio, were gray-on-gray, & nobody knew enough to ask why. Then I saw some real B&W printed from a 16mm Minox neg &, even with the grain, they just blew everything else away! The manager said, "Oh. I had to get rid of those two guys. They were troublemakers." I hope they quit! I had something similar happen to me. Manager left a must have shot off the list the CEO wanted for the Annual Report. I was the low man on the totem pole, so they ("manager" & director) tried to blame me & sent me to personnel for an "Attitude Readjustment".
Thing was, I HAD A LIST! The shot wasn't on it. After investigation, HR found that the manager was incompetent, & the director was playing CYA.
Final outcome, the department decided to keep the PITA manager since he had only 2 years to go to retirement. I packed up my cameras & hit the road. Life is too short to have to fight with your own people to be allowed to do your job! ;-)

[booggerg]

I'm still waiting for the day when they come out with a sensor that would emulate the look of film.....

[Persian-Rice]

booggerg, though I agree, there are some cameras out there that are getting very close. Some of the digital backs out there are doing a very good job. I can speak from experience that the PhaseOne back is very good. I also know the 1Ds produces very good looking pictures that look "film like" with some minor adjustments.

[UncleDoug]

It's not necssarily the sensor, more like the software processing the color of the image.

If it was a hardware specific issue, then you would need a DSLR or back for each style of film color emulation.

I have heard of software filters for PS and others that will take RAW data and apply a Velvia color filter to it, or other film type color emulations.

[Citizensmith]

I don't particularly shoot film because its film, just because I sometimes want to shoot full frame and can't even come close to affording a 1 series DSLR.

[cjm]

I shot with film today. Then again I used my digital camera much much more also today. I have about 11 rolls of film waiting to be developed. Last time I developed film was early this year. I like using film, but probably because I have not got my full use out of my $1000 CAD Elan 7 Body with Grip.

[staudenj]

100% FILM 4 ME. I process C-41 straight to CD. Consequently, I get B&W (technically color neg film is B&W silver based), I get negs (overexposed for shadows w/max info), I get digital files (print & web ready), I get excellent saturated color (high chroma/proper values), I get full copyright protection (I own all the negs), My production work flow is maxed (the desire to see every shot instantly is an interference to discipline), I have all the shots I ever took (no deleting), My images are usually perfectly exposed so I only use photoshop to balance everything for the printer (which is great), The costs are low because I am there already. One could make an argument against film, but several manufacturers are providing dual film/digital systems for demanding pros. Personally, I love film...but have nothing against digital. I have the best of all these worlds at a lower cost and tailored to my current needs.

[Kennymc]

My images are usually perfectly exposed so I only use photoshop to balance everything for the printer (which is great),

I've been waiting to meet you, the photographer who always gets perfectly exposed images every time... I thought you were only a myth...

:lol:

[Citizensmith]

the desire to see every shot instantly is an interference to discipline

Not at all. Thats just what you are telling yourself so you can accept all your are missing out on by being able to review shots as you take them and improve your subsequent shots based on that feedback. Oh wait, you get perfect eposure every time so I guess you don't need that.

I have all the shots I ever took (no deleting)

Umm, nobody said you have to delete things with digital.

The costs are low because I am there already.

The initial investment with film is much lower than digital. But running costs..... Doesn't film cost money or something? I mean you could actually work out how much each shot cost you in film and development. What and odd concept. :)

I am so glad that film has become an occasional thing for me rather than the bread and butter work of photography.

[defordphoto]

I've been waiting to meet you, the photographer who always gets perfectly exposed images every time... I thought you were only a myth...

:lol:

Amazing...And we thought the Internet was cool. ;)

[Scottes]

The costs are low because I am there already.
This guy must be a demon with a Holga. And Seattle Film Works' best customer.

[PhotosGuy]

100% FILM 4 ME. I process C-41 straight to CD...My images are usually perfectly exposed so I only use photoshop to balance everything for the printer (which is great),... Good for you! Curious, I thought that meteor strike in Siberia wiped you guys out! :D