Have you tried returning to film photography?

If you want to take a class, there are still some colleges with darkrooms that you can learn, but I would act fast, its a dying art.

But you can learn via youtube if you like
http://www.youtube.com …lopment&search_​type=&aq=f
Thats how I learned. Hopefully this year Ill get to do some color development and printing at home.

DrPablo wrote in post #9511952
Yes and no -- it's not just about the variables themselves. There are lots of camera designs other than SLRs, I mean I own 6 different kinds of camera (view camera, rotating lens panoramic camera, twin lens reflex, rangefinder, small format SLR, Hasselblad SLR, and compact P&S) and the mechanics and approach to these things can really vary. While in the end the variables are similar, the way you interface with them is very different. I have a totally different mindset using an 8x10 camera, when I think deeply and heavily about the camera, versus the Hasselblad when I think only about the subject. With my 7D it's somewhere in between, but I also have the "shoot until I get it right" approach -- with film I have the "get it right before I shoot" approach. One wonderful thing about Hasselblad V-series lenses is that the aperture and shutter speed dials are linked, so you basically have Av and Tv modes intrinsically built into the lens -- it's easier and quicker and more intuitive than on any DSLR I've ever used. You set your exposure, and then if you want the aperture to be stopped down by one, the speed also changes reciprocally by 1 stop.

Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification.

obnoxiousmom wrote in post #9511286
. I wonder if you can still take classes to learn? I think it would be awesome

I teach classes and had to convert my classes to digital as my classes were getting empty. I had my own Dark room and the classes were basically to keep new chemicals and stuff going. Chemicals are only good for a week once mixed.

Running a dark room is fun till you try to process say 2 rolls of 36 EXP. That will take you a hole day.Than I work at a lab and also repaired other labs. This gave me all access to someone else's Lab.

It's like taking a bike ride. It is fun around the block. What if you decided to get rid of the car and bike everywhere. Not so fun. Doing 4 or 5 B/W by hand is about my limit of fun.

Acropora wrote in post #9492689
Kodachrome? Not for much longer - I think not only is it not being produced, but I think they said the last lab to process it would stop in 2010. Are you still getting it processed?

It turns out there hasn't been a new master roll created in 2 or 3 years (just kept in deep freeze and new rolls cut out of it). The only place in the world that still develops it, Dwyanes in Kansas, will have chemicals to develop it through at least the end of 2010.

DrPablo wrote in post #9511066
Man, spend some time looking through the ground glass of an 8x10" view camera and you might change your mind

It would certainly be fun to try just because I've never shot MF or LF cameras. When I was shooting 35mm, I had the worst case of lust for a Mamiya 645. Problem was, at that time it was way out of reach for me financially.

randerson07 wrote in post #9511958
If you want to take a class, there are still some colleges with darkrooms that you can learn, but I would act fast, its a dying art.

But you can learn via youtube if you like
http://www.youtube.com …lopment&search_​type=&aq=f
Thats how I learned. Hopefully this year Ill get to do some color development and printing at home.

Thank you!

I still consider myself a photography rookie and found that taking pictures with film after digital really helped me with composition and even more with lighting. For a while, I was totally that person who would go take a ton of pictures without really worrying about composition and lighting because I knew I could just delete the picture and take a new one right there. I realized I had a "problem" when I went to DC and took about 50 pictures of the Washington Monument - and they all were essentially the same - I probably shouldn't admit that ). I went back to film for a bit specifically so I would put thought into my pictures before just clicking away. It really helped me when I started using my digital camera again.

I am selling my Mamiya 645 kit cause I don't use it anymore!

The cost of processing the rolls is too much these days and I just can't afford it anymore!

Its pretty sad!

Processing and printing or just processing??

MHO wrote in post #9516663
The cost of processing the rolls is too much these days and I just can't afford it anymore!

You've got around $10,000 of equipment in your signature and it's too expensive to pay $3 to get a roll of film developed?

My lab charges $2.60 to process C41 medium format film and $2.85 to process E6. B&W if you're so inclined is the easiest thing in the world to process in your own house and it costs just a few cents per roll if you're doing it yourself.

processing and contact sheets is a 20 min job and still fun. Printing all picks is the headache. I found myself picking one or two out of a 36 exp. and going for an 8X10. The rest only saw a contact sheet. Its not that I did like them but to much work for individual prints. A 2 hour shoot can put you in the dark room for two days if you printed all the keepers.

DrPablo wrote in post #9517181
You've got around $10,000 of equipment in your signature and it's too expensive to pay $3 to get a roll of film developed?

My lab charges $2.60 to process C41 medium format film and $2.85 to process E6. B&W if you're so inclined is the easiest thing in the world to process in your own house and it costs just a few cents per roll if you're doing it yourself.

You can not even touch those prices in you own home. Their is 4 chemicals that will cost you about $12 a bag. You can't mix half bags. They make a gallon at a time. The $48 is whats needed to do 1 roll or 100 rolls. I have not look at chemical prices in about 5 years but they normally don't change.

That is just the cost for the neg or slides with out a contact sheet you just have a box of Negs.Viewing on a light table is not good enough(I still have mine) No way to sort,categorize. That contact sheet of a 36EXP of 35MM will be the cost of 2 8X10's (closer to $20 per roll). I am guessing on a Med format 8 per sheet. Plus where forgetting the $6 per roll cost.At your house 3 more chemicals so $36 for 1 print or 100 prints. All these chemicals also have a shelf life of about 1 month.

It would be more reasonable to let the lab do it at those prices.

Most medium format film costs less than $6 per roll of 120.

And if you buy enough chemicals to do 100 rolls but you only develop 1, then you're still developing 1 roll cheaply -- you're just wasting the other 99 rolls worth. Shelf life of 1 month?? That's crap, I've been using the same packet of xtol for around 4 years.

The question of what you do with a developed slide or negative is a different story. For me, I own a drum scanner, I scan them, I get a digital image. You can get a cheap desktop scanner that is nice enough for web sharing, and get pro scans for the occasional print. For black and white I print a couple of them on my own, usually using alternative processes like cyanotyping.

DrPablo wrote in post #9517181
You've got around $10,000 of equipment in your signature and it's too expensive to pay $3 to get a roll of film developed?

My lab charges $2.60 to process C41 medium format film and $2.85 to process E6. B&W if you're so inclined is the easiest thing in the world to process in your own house and it costs just a few cents per roll if you're doing it yourself.

But the question still remains -- cheap or expensive, why bother? I suppose if you're looking for a very specific result that only film can generate, then have at it. For me (and a few others, I suspect), digital is so much better than film that I'm not even close to considering a return to film.

Tallking wrote in post #9518533
But the question still remains -- cheap or expensive, why bother? I suppose if you're looking for a very specific result that only film can generate, then have at it. For me (and a few others, I suspect), digital is so much better than film that I'm not even close to considering a return to film.

Digital can't match the dynamic range medium format can achieve. And the photos are extremely sharp and detailed (of course with quality glass).