LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Have you tried returning to film photography?

FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk
Thread started 28 Jan 2010 (Thursday) 04:26   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
robscomputer
Senior Member
robscomputer's Avatar
Joined Dec 2009
429 posts
Union City, CA
[MORE/SHARE]

I got started in photography in 1989, my high school class in black and white photography. From there I took film photography up until 2002 where I slowly switched over to digital, starting with a point and shoot, then a digital SLR in 2005. From there it's been entirely digital.

Just recently I've been searching medium format cameras as a bit of taking back to a slower method. I enjoy the older cameras, especially the manual focus SLR's and how they were built like tanks. Just how mechanical some of the older gear is, and how you're capturing images with something so simple.

I've been meaning to scan my old negatives so I'll purchase a flatbed scanner and just have a film processing lab developing. But after thinking about this, I seriously wonder does anyone go back to film even part time or just for fun?

I greatly enjoy digital, but I feel like shooting film is harder since you are flying by instruments instead of visual.

Just thinking!

Post #1, Jan 28, 2010 04:26:25


Amateur photographer

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Spacemunkie
Goldmember
Spacemunkie's Avatar
Joined Apr 2008
1,381 posts
Feilding, NZ
[MORE/SHARE]

I still dabble with analogue. It's undoubtedly a different experience and I still love the quality of film but it's just so inconvenient and time/money consuming that I can see me flogging off most of my analogue gear unless I can acquire a house with enough extra space to build another darkroom in.

Post #2, Jan 28, 2010 04:32:16


Scott/Spacemunkie:My photosexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
DrPablo
Goldmember
DrPablo's Avatar
Joined Jan 2006
1,561 posts
North Carolina
[MORE/SHARE]

I still prefer film far over digital. The main utility of digital for me is to take pictures of my toddler, which demands a lot of snapshooting flexibility. But my main portrait camera is a Hasselblad, my main landscape camera is a Noblex panoramic medium format camera, and my main love-of-photography cameras are large format view cameras (4x5 and 8x10).

Post #3, Jan 28, 2010 08:12:14 as a reply to Spacemunkie's post 3 hours earlier.


Cameras: Canon 7D, Agfa 8x10, Cambo 4x5, Noblex 150, Hasselblad 500 C/M,
Canon lineup: 17-55 f/2.8 IS, Sigma 30 f/1.4, Sigma 50 f/1.4, Sigma 85 f/1.4, Canon 85 f/1.8, Canon 100 f/2.8L macro, Canon 135 f/2L, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 100-400 L, Canon MP-E 65/2.8 1-5x macro, 580EX, MT-24 EX

LOG IN TO REPLY
sjones
Goldmember
sjones's Avatar
Joined Aug 2005
2,072 posts
Asheville, NC
[MORE/SHARE]

Although my first camera dates back to a Kodak Instamatic in the 70s, my obsessive venture into photography started with a Canon DSLR. Now, however, I just use a 50-year-old rangefinder and Tri-X. Putting aside any issues of quality or convenience, I simply love the process of using a film camera. I plan one day to mess around with a twin lens reflex (TLR).

Post #4, Jan 28, 2010 08:54:09 as a reply to DrPablo's post 41 minutes earlier.


Asheville, July-November 2014external link / Savannah, October 2014external link
Glad I can enjoy Gursky, let alone not feel threatened by his work.
It's the Photographerexternal link | God Loves Photoshopexternal link | Photography & Artexternal link | Art Sucksexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Depth
Senior Member
Depth's Avatar
Joined May 2009
986 posts
Norcal/Socal
[MORE/SHARE]

I find myself shooting film more than digital. Just need to get around to uploading it.

http://www.flickr.com ...0/sets/721576185045​09270/external link

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm5.static.fl​ickr.com ...4309789537_d901069f​96.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...4115515171_d17d51c3​87.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR



I miss this rental lens. :(

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm4.static.fl​ickr.com ...4081189425_5f455140​ee.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Post #5, Jan 28, 2010 09:25:14


Gear List
ACCD

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
HappySnapper90
Cream of the Crop
Joined Aug 2008
5,111 posts
Cleveland, Ohio
[MORE/SHARE]

Most of what I shoot now is film. Velvia, kodachrome, b+w TMX100, Ektar 100. Except for wildlife or conditions that are not suitable for slow film speeds as 50 or 100.

Post #6, Jan 28, 2010 10:54:21


http://RobertHoy.zenfo​lio.comexternal link
www.photographybyhoy.c​omexternal link
http://www.facebook.co​m/Photography.by.Hoyexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
scotteisenphotography
Goldmember
scotteisenphotography's Avatar
Joined Aug 2007
4,053 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Shoot analog all the time. Canon EOS 1V, Speedgraphic 4x5, Cambo 8x10, and a Hasselblad 500 c/m

Post #7, Jan 28, 2010 10:56:41


Canon 1Dx|Canon 1D Mark IV|Canon 5D Mark III|14mm 2.8L II|16-35mm 2.8L II|24mm 1.4L II|35mm 1.4L|50mm 1.2L |85mm 1.2L II|70-200 2.8L IS|200mm 2.0L IS|300mm 2.8L IS|400mm 2.8L IS|800mm 5.6L IS| 580EX II| 600EX RT II|

LOG IN TO REPLY
Brikwall
Senior Member
Joined Apr 2007
840 posts
Atlantic Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

I find it funny when people refer to film as "analog." Just call it film, for heaven's sake... :lol:

I've dabbled with it every now and again, from shooting 35mm to playing around with medium format. I have to push myself to do it: digital just seems so easy - too easy - in comparison. But I can't see myself giving it up totally, either. There's just something about it that's hard to explain...

Post #8, Jan 28, 2010 11:10:10


Dan
Some gear, some experience, and no talent.
Web: http://www.macdonald-photography.comexternal link | http://ambientlight.ze​nfolio.comexternal link |
http://danmacdonald.50​0px.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Mosca
Senior Member
Joined Jul 2008
542 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

IMO film is also digital; photons are quantum particles, after all, and at its essence the world is digital. It is our perception that causes it to be seen as analog.

I never shot film, but I learned it after learning computer processing. For me, the advantage is being able to do the post processing. I don't have the space, or time, or money to process my own film.

Post #9, Jan 28, 2010 11:17:02


_______________
Too much gear and not enough brains

LOG IN TO REPLY
AxxisPhoto
Goldmember
AxxisPhoto's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
1,833 posts
Chicago, IL
[MORE/SHARE]

I really miss shooting film. The whole process of loading the camera, dialing in the settings from the lightmeter to loading the film in the developing canister. Then there is printing/enlarging, which is an artform unto itself.

Post #10, Jan 28, 2010 11:21:57


Alex
2x 5Dmk2 | 70-200mm f2.8L IS | 24-105mm f4L IS | Alien Bees lights |
AxxisPhotoexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
kdlanejr
Hatchling
Joined Aug 2003
3 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

robscomputer wrote in post #9488334external link
I got started in photography in 1989, my high school class in black and white photography. From there I took film photography up until 2002 where I slowly switched over to digital, starting with a point and shoot, then a digital SLR in 2005. From there it's been entirely digital.

Just recently I've been searching medium format cameras as a bit of taking back to a slower method. I enjoy the older cameras, especially the manual focus SLR's and how they were built like tanks. Just how mechanical some of the older gear is, and how you're capturing images with something so simple.

I've been meaning to scan my old negatives so I'll purchase a flatbed scanner and just have a film processing lab developing. But after thinking about this, I seriously wonder does anyone go back to film even part time or just for fun?

I greatly enjoy digital, but I feel like shooting film is harder since you are flying by instruments instead of visual.

Just thinking!

Film is only harder than digital if you don't understand your film equipment... much like many new photo enthusiasts don't understand their digital equipment.

If you take the time to set your exposure properly with film, your results should consistently be better than shooting digital for no other reason than film possessing a larger dynamic range than digital sensors currently do.

Things that make film "harder" ==> Perceived cost. Buy film, develop film, pay for prints, pay for enlargements... repeat, repeat, repeat... If you develop your own and print your own, you add another level of re-occurring expense to your process. While developing and printing your own film can be very enjoyable, chemical waste management and disposal will slowly become an issue adding additional costs to the process.

I still have a number of film bodies. All except one is ready to use at any given moment. I also still have undeveloped rolls of film for which developing has no immediate priority, the age of which I couldn't even begin to tell you.

Post #11, Jan 28, 2010 12:20:49




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
DrPablo
Goldmember
DrPablo's Avatar
Joined Jan 2006
1,561 posts
North Carolina
[MORE/SHARE]

Film is easier in some ways. The shutters for all my different film camera lenses have fewer variables and fewer intermediate steps -- under daylight conditions, I know that 1/125 at f/11 will properly expose ISO 100 slide film. I've done it enough. So if I want a shallower DOF I know I can do an equivalent EV like 1/500 at f/5.6 (fine for shallow DOF on medium format). And I know that I need to open up a stop for ISO 50 film, and I recognize when lighting conditions are 1 or 2 stops darker than sunlight (or brighter, like for very bright beach or snow scenes).

So often times I don't even use a light meter.

Post #12, Jan 28, 2010 12:34:32 as a reply to kdlanejr's post 13 minutes earlier.


Cameras: Canon 7D, Agfa 8x10, Cambo 4x5, Noblex 150, Hasselblad 500 C/M,
Canon lineup: 17-55 f/2.8 IS, Sigma 30 f/1.4, Sigma 50 f/1.4, Sigma 85 f/1.4, Canon 85 f/1.8, Canon 100 f/2.8L macro, Canon 135 f/2L, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 100-400 L, Canon MP-E 65/2.8 1-5x macro, 580EX, MT-24 EX

LOG IN TO REPLY
yogestee
"hangs around male genitalia"
yogestee's Avatar
Joined Dec 2007
13,605 posts
Aussie living in Laos
[MORE/SHARE]

I shot film from 1975 until 2004 but started shooting with a DSLR in 1999..

The only film I miss is shooting 4x5.. There is just something special about large format..

35mm,,nah.. I'll never go back..

Post #13, Jan 28, 2010 12:47:55 as a reply to DrPablo's post 13 minutes earlier.


Jurgen
50D~20D~700D~EOS M~S95

http://www.pbase.com/j​urgentreueexternal link
The Title Fairy,, off with her head!!

LOG IN TO REPLY
Sam
Goldmember
Sam's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
4,040 posts
Northern California
[MORE/SHARE]

If I had a darkroom I would shoot more film. I just bought a bunch of film last week and have been shooting through those rolls. I do like the difference in images that film can produce vs. digital but for me it's more about using my old cameras than the film.

Post #14, Jan 28, 2010 12:49:56 as a reply to yogestee's post 2 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
DeVVitt
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2009
362 posts
The Netherlands
[MORE/SHARE]

I only shoot digital at the moment, but am certainly interested into film since it still has a certain character which digital somehow doesn't seem to have.
So, maybe in the future a nice old Hasselblad camera? Takes a while to save up to as a student, but with a beauty like that it just has to work out.

Post #15, Jan 28, 2010 13:21:41



LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
2,962 views & 0 likes for this thread
Have you tried returning to film photography?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.0008 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
1044 guests, 818 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is cjcibe

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.