Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Is there a definite move back to film by many???  (Read 17489 times)
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #40 on: February 25, 2009, 02:10:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KLaban
Sorry to hear about your fogged film. I must admit I am paranoid about x-ray damage. Having said that, and despite multiple passes including Heathrow I've yet to experience a problem. I take it that you put your film in carry-on rather than checked luggage?


Hi Keith

My first calendar for Tennentīs Lager was shot in Mallorca. On the way back home, the party was allowed through control, but I was held back because I was reluctant to allow Kodachrome 64 Pro through the X-Ray machine, despite the usual assurances that it was film-safe. It claimed so on a label stuck on the side of the damn thing, giving the operators all the amo they needed. I resisted, saying I knew better, and the tension grew - at least for me - until some more security folks arrived to see what was going down. The film bag was then taken off me, shoved into the machine and that was that.

I can confirm that X-Ray has the effect of turning tanned skin greenish.

I swore I would never visit their benighted isle again. That was 1979. Ironic, then, that two years later I went there to live and am still kicking around the place, if a little more slowly.

Rob C
« Last Edit: February 25, 2009, 02:11:15 PM by Rob C » Logged

epatsellis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #41 on: February 25, 2009, 09:02:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bcooter
The last meeting I had on Madison Avenue, the AD asked somewhat sheepishly, if I would mind shooting digital for a large project.  I replied, no no problem most of my current work is digital and he was surprised, actually almost shocked that I didn't find that an issue.  In fact, if truth be told I think I probably dropped a half step in his eyes by not proclaiming that film is the best solution, though keep in mind this is New York and also keep in mind that perception is much stronger than reality, in fact in the major cities of photography perception is reality.

Had I insisted that I shoot the project with film, I believe it would have been accepted.

As far as what is film, well it's still around and many of the "names" in this business prefer it, or better put prefer working with their old RZ's, pentax 6x7's, view cameras etc.  It kind of falls under the heading if it ain't broke, don't fix it

...snip...

So what's film?   Well it depends on where your standing, but I wish more now than ever that the digital process had never started.  In New York you can shoot film, here in Cooter, Mo., we shoot digital.

Regardless, film is not dead and if there was any serious investment dollars left in the world, it might make a comeback.

I expect any day to open up PDN and see a photo of 8,000 photographers standing on the Hudson dropping their electronic cameras in the river, with the headline that says, Photographers say enough is enough, we want to make photographs, not work on computers.
I know that here, in rural Illinois, middle of nowhere, my product work is predominently LF digital, though my portfolio and selective clients work are shot with film. (the ones that want quality and archivability), the  down side is that I process all C41 in house, it's becoming a neccesity these days. A great part of whether your client wants to use film is education on the shooter's part as well, once I showed one client the same image captured digitally and with film, he saw the advantages clearly. IMO, at small repro sizes, (less than full page) the waters are significantly muddied, as catalog work where lighting and w/b doesn't change, post processing is negligible, and digitally clearly is the more efficient workflow. Of course I use a scan back (and a MF Megavision S3 back), not the latest and greatest, so my view may be skewed somewhat.
Logged
mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #42 on: February 25, 2009, 09:59:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi
Film is pretty much dead for us except for my 35mm panoramic camera ( Nobelux & Widelux). Stitching is not the same. We have made a decision to get rid of our remaining dark room equipment last week.
Denis
Logged

Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell
www.montalbetticampbell.com
bcroslin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 324


WWW
« Reply #43 on: February 25, 2009, 10:07:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Two anecdotes:

1: A friend just met with one of the large and respected editorial agencies in NYC recently and was surprised when the director informed him 90% of the agency's photographers still shoot medium format film.

2: Jake Chessum came through town recently to shoot a cover for Vibe with a rapper I've done a lot of work with. The owner of the studio Jake rented said he was surprised to see Chessum's assistants unpack an RZ and a bunch of film backs. He figured Jake must have shot over 100 rolls of film. The studio happens to rent Phase backs but Jake wanted nothing to do with them from what I was told.

Different strokes for different folks is all. I love film but when push comes to shove I'll shoot digital because I'm not afraid of it. I know I can do things with digital that I could never do with film. I only wish the workflow was as simple as film. I also hate the fact that I've become the lab, the retoucher and prepress and clients balk at paying the fees associated with the time it takes to do those other three jobs.

Bob
« Last Edit: February 25, 2009, 10:27:52 PM by bcroslin » Logged

Bob Croslin, Photographer
http://www.bobcroslin.com
Anders_HK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001



WWW
« Reply #44 on: February 25, 2009, 10:19:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KLaban
Sorry to hear about your fogged film. I must admit I am paranoid about x-ray damage. Having said that, and despite multiple passes including Heathrow I've yet to experience a problem. I take it that you put your film in carry-on rather than checked luggage?

I live overseas as an expat and do frequent travels worldwide. Film have high risk of being damaged by the x-ray machines used for check-in luggage. Never run film through those. On the other hand; Carry-on x-ray machines do not damage film, especially low ISO. I base that also on my own experience of carrying also high speed film on a round the world voyage and 50-400 ISO on numerous times also to third world countries.

Above said, multiple passes may not be good, although I have film go through countless times in carry-on x-ray machines. In such cases can be good to ask for a hand search and it is granted in most countries if one persists.

I have no experience in carrying large volumes of film onto a plane. I prefer making limited shots and getting good captures on those. I can say that you would probably be surprised at the amount of gear I have been able to carry onto flights. I never check in my camera gear or computer. It is my private property. Per some international regulation or practice, the carry on of one camera and computer is exempt from weight check.

Regards
Anders
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8074



WWW
« Reply #45 on: February 26, 2009, 12:15:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Wayne Fox
that's intriguing.  any thoughts as to why?

There is a very widespread and deeply rooted belief that slide colors are better to start with.

I hear also people complain about the way digital cameras render the sun and about lack of smooth transitions in skies.

They should see this...



Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: February 26, 2009, 12:17:35 AM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
JustinWaldingerPhoto
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65


WWW
« Reply #46 on: February 26, 2009, 12:21:07 AM »
ReplyReply

As a MF Film shooter for the past 8 years and also a P20+ owner, I still use film in order to take advantage of the a real "Full Frame" camera, my wide angle lenses become wide again when I use them with my AFD III and for me I love it, more importantly I heart fuji velvia 50, provia 100F, Ilford pan f Plus, and T-max to name a few    

sure Id like to own a P65+ but can't justify its $40,000 price tag!   I use my P20+ now to shoot portraits mostly.

I read an article dated in 2007 that claimed 75% of pro photographers still shoot film and will continue to shoot film, mainly for Black and White.  No argument there!


and now....a little blast from the past.  This was an 8 minute exposure with provia100F  


regards,

-j
Logged
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1548


WWW
« Reply #47 on: February 26, 2009, 12:41:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I never gave up film for my personal work, I like the look of film and the tradition of a view camera, but for my bread and butter, my architectural photography it is dead. We got to where we had to do our own scanning and we were spending half our time scanning and still had the post work to do. Since there are no labs in town we would have to do our own processing now too. Forget it. The digital workflow is far superior and I am able to easily surpass the DR of transparency films like Velvia. There is no turning back. And I know pros all over the country and there is no movement back as far as know, though a few AP are still shooting film.
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
arashm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 142


« Reply #48 on: February 26, 2009, 01:11:58 AM »
ReplyReply

There is a very widespread and deeply rooted belief that slide colors are better to start with.

I hear also people complain about the way digital cameras render the sun and about lack of smooth transitions in skies.

They should see this...



Cheers,
Bernard
[/quote]


Bernard

D3X I assume?
am
Logged
MHFA
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


« Reply #49 on: February 26, 2009, 03:16:22 AM »
ReplyReply

I donīt think there is a move back. Rainer just said Germans architectural photographers are the last professionels using film and he is right. A friend just bought a new 8x10 (in Ebay you have thousands of 4x5, but only a few 8x10).
Meanwhile there are some clients (artists, museums) prefering film there are people using it. Also there are always clients whishing the not-usual.

M.Heinrich
Logged
hobbsr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 110


« Reply #50 on: February 26, 2009, 05:46:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi All,

I focus mainly on the wedding market and moving more and more to the higher end of what I offer my clients and I have been seriously considering moving back to film. There are some very successful higher end photographers in the US doing very well from this and I think this sets a little trend to the return of film. very simply put I see these as the three key point for me and my business:
1. Creates a market differentiation - I see this as a return of the black box(craft) and the theatre of photography without thinking of it as going back to static posed images
2. The workflow - shoot drop the film off pick-up the prints/scans and I still have all the benefits of the digital side i.e albums, slideshows without the hours of post production
3. Archival nature of film as an object

As of tomorrow am trying to shoot various parts of the coverage on the 645 - Portra skintone what a wonderful thing!

Regards

PS also will offer fine art BW TMAX portraits
Logged
Anders_HK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001



WWW
« Reply #51 on: February 26, 2009, 05:50:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
There is a very widespread and deeply rooted belief that slide colors are better to start with.

I hear also people complain about the way digital cameras render the sun and about lack of smooth transitions in skies.

They should see this...



Cheers,
Bernard

Bernard and All,

I am a man who speaks my mind out. Bernard, you have posted alot of quality posts in the past. That is very much appreciated. This is a thread entitled "Is there a definite move back to film by many???". I guess I fail to see what possibly your image has to do with film. I guess... simply because there was no film.

I had Nikon before and thought it was the world. Now I know that any camera is merely a TOOL for the image. If you are happy with your D2X -> ZD -> D3X changes and keep raving about them that is fine. In retrospect on a number of posts in threads recent and not pointing at you directly, it is as if they were written as sticks out to people who shoot and enjoy FILM or MEDIUM FORMAT. That frank is so very silly childish. If anyone fails to see the difference or fails to experience the difference of such TOOLS, then let it be that way. However there are many who still enjoy them. Then what silly point are such childish games to try aggrevate the joys that people have? Perhaps same as camera companies brain washing people of that DX format was same as FX??? Silly. They are different, but silent went the DX prayers when FX came true...

Granted there are ways that your D3X will beat a Leaf Aptus 65 on an AFDIII or a P65 on a Hassy, or even my Mamiya 7 loaded with Fuji Velvia 50, but... there are ways that those will kill and run circles around your D3X, just different TOOLS.

About that image, sorry, but I fail to see that it equals or even better beloved FUJI VELVIA 50 slides. It is simply different. Even more I do not see what it direct has to do with the subject of this thread. No, digital is not better. It is different. The main disadvantage with film nowadays though was as hinted by some post above that FILM is difficult today, because the world is DIGITAL. That does not mean that digital is better. In many ways indeed FILM is BETTER. Some appreciate art of different counts... I simply play MP3 while other have ear for more...

Now, this thread was asking "Is there a definite move back to film by many???" I am only one of the many persons here who have stated we still shoot film and/or love FILM, and do bear in mind that this website is frequented primarily by people who shoot digital, and thus you see an impressive count in posts by users of FILM in above. Then that proves, FILM is still a beloved and much joyful media today. Perhaps some of you who have not tried it, should do so. And do try larger than 35mm, it makes you see better.

Further, apart from my two posts above I should say that I recent bought a 4x5 Shen-Hao TFC45-IIB so indeed I still grow with FILM to larger size because I enjoy FILM. FILM is now simply a different media to me than digital is. And no, development of digital technology is not matured, where is my Leaf Aptus Foveon type 645-sized sensor larger than 50MP (Yikes, dont make more or I have to spend $$$ on $$$ lenses!)? Or my Leaf Aptus Foveon type 4x5 sized sensor of 300MP??? And... keep it cheap! The Shen-Hao is frank a lovely camera, and with myself having been burnt and lost $$$ on the faulty ZD I am happy I went for Chinese instead of Japanese made. I am frank impressed by the camera's sheer simplicity compared to digital. Nope, I do not need to carry a charger and cables for it. Heck, I do not even need to carry a battery!!! And yes, the LCD measures 118mm x 98mm making it full grand 6 (SIX) inches LCD. Now if we are measuring sizes here, I am sure of at least that beats D3X... and ... at less cost. Viewing is how I see. Photography is about seeing. To my surprise really, the Shen-Hao is very simple to load each frame in using Fuji Quickloads, no more difficult than 35 was, only by each frame by frame. Metering; also using spot meter and zone system makes shots arrive spot on, no waste. Thus no big number of shots to review and process. Simply an amazing tool. Now is still an age where we have ample choices of FILM. Nope not as many as used to, but still ample. It is a joy to still use FILM. Am I definite heading back to film? It is tempting to say yes, but no... (I confess) because I simply do not want to give up my Aptus 65 either. They are different. I am current designing a custom made sliding adapter for it to use on my Shen-Hao, but... guess what... it will be far simpler to use FILM Quickloads. Then again... just different tools...

Regards
Anders
« Last Edit: February 26, 2009, 05:58:42 AM by Anders_HK » Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8074



WWW
« Reply #52 on: February 26, 2009, 08:43:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Anders_HK
I am a man who speaks my mind out. Bernard, you have posted alot of quality posts in the past. That is very much appreciated. This is a thread entitled "Is there a definite move back to film by many???". I guess I fail to see what possibly your image has to do with film. I guess... simply because there was no film.

Have you even read what I wrote above?

This image was posted in the context of a comment explaining that many people in Japan had the feeling the digital images had a hard time dealing with smooth transitions in skies. That's it. Nothing more.

I still shoot slide film myself on 4x5 from time to time and like it for what it is. I have nothing against shooting film, I am just saying that some of the reasons why people are not considering digital in Japan are simply not valid anymore.

Quote from: Anders_HK
I had Nikon before and thought it was the world. Now I know that any camera is merely a TOOL for the image. If you are happy with your D2X -> ZD -> D3X changes and keep raving about them that is fine. In retrospect on a number of posts in threads recent and not pointing at you directly, it is as if they were written as sticks out to people who shoot and enjoy FILM or MEDIUM FORMAT. That frank is so very silly childish. If anyone fails to see the difference or fails to experience the difference of such TOOLS, then let it be that way. However there are many who still enjoy them. Then what silly point are such childish games to try aggrevate the joys that people have? Perhaps same as camera companies brain washing people of that DX format was same as FX??? Silly. They are different, but silent went the DX prayers when FX came true...

I don't remember insisting on the fact that this image was shot with a D3x, or even mentioning it for that matter. I believe that other recent digital bodies would have done as well. You like shooting film or a back? Great, I like that too.

I am frankly a bit surprised by your reaction. You are putting in my mouth words that I have not pronounced and are calling them childish...  This is all about you man.

Quote from: Anders_HK
Granted there are ways that your D3X will beat a Leaf Aptus 65 on an AFDIII or a P65 on a Hassy, or even my Mamiya 7 loaded with Fuji Velvia 50, but... there are ways that those will kill and run circles around your D3X, just different TOOLS.

Euh... yes. I don't remember having claimed that the D3x was the best camera on earth, have I? I happen to use this tool a lot and rest assured that I don't sleep with my camera.  If anything you are the one coming back with a comparison between them and proposing a value ranking. I am not.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001


WWW
« Reply #53 on: February 26, 2009, 11:27:01 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm with you Anders. Film is different. Vive la difference!
Eduardo

Quote from: Anders_HK
Bernard and All,

I am a man who speaks my mind out. Bernard, you have posted alot of quality posts in the past. That is very much appreciated. This is a thread entitled "Is there a definite move back to film by many???". I guess I fail to see what possibly your image has to do with film. I guess... simply because there was no film.

I had Nikon before and thought it was the world. Now I know that any camera is merely a TOOL for the image. If you are happy with your D2X -> ZD -> D3X changes and keep raving about them that is fine. In retrospect on a number of posts in threads recent and not pointing at you directly, it is as if they were written as sticks out to people who shoot and enjoy FILM or MEDIUM FORMAT. That frank is so very silly childish. If anyone fails to see the difference or fails to experience the difference of such TOOLS, then let it be that way. However there are many who still enjoy them. Then what silly point are such childish games to try aggrevate the joys that people have? Perhaps same as camera companies brain washing people of that DX format was same as FX??? Silly. They are different, but silent went the DX prayers when FX came true...

Granted there are ways that your D3X will beat a Leaf Aptus 65 on an AFDIII or a P65 on a Hassy, or even my Mamiya 7 loaded with Fuji Velvia 50, but... there are ways that those will kill and run circles around your D3X, just different TOOLS.

About that image, sorry, but I fail to see that it equals or even better beloved FUJI VELVIA 50 slides. It is simply different. Even more I do not see what it direct has to do with the subject of this thread. No, digital is not better. It is different. The main disadvantage with film nowadays though was as hinted by some post above that FILM is difficult today, because the world is DIGITAL. That does not mean that digital is better. In many ways indeed FILM is BETTER. Some appreciate art of different counts... I simply play MP3 while other have ear for more...

Now, this thread was asking "Is there a definite move back to film by many???" I am only one of the many persons here who have stated we still shoot film and/or love FILM, and do bear in mind that this website is frequented primarily by people who shoot digital, and thus you see an impressive count in posts by users of FILM in above. Then that proves, FILM is still a beloved and much joyful media today. Perhaps some of you who have not tried it, should do so. And do try larger than 35mm, it makes you see better.

Further, apart from my two posts above I should say that I recent bought a 4x5 Shen-Hao TFC45-IIB so indeed I still grow with FILM to larger size because I enjoy FILM. FILM is now simply a different media to me than digital is. And no, development of digital technology is not matured, where is my Leaf Aptus Foveon type 645-sized sensor larger than 50MP (Yikes, dont make more or I have to spend $$$ on $$$ lenses!)? Or my Leaf Aptus Foveon type 4x5 sized sensor of 300MP??? And... keep it cheap! The Shen-Hao is frank a lovely camera, and with myself having been burnt and lost $$$ on the faulty ZD I am happy I went for Chinese instead of Japanese made. I am frank impressed by the camera's sheer simplicity compared to digital. Nope, I do not need to carry a charger and cables for it. Heck, I do not even need to carry a battery!!! And yes, the LCD measures 118mm x 98mm making it full grand 6 (SIX) inches LCD. Now if we are measuring sizes here, I am sure of at least that beats D3X... and ... at less cost. Viewing is how I see. Photography is about seeing. To my surprise really, the Shen-Hao is very simple to load each frame in using Fuji Quickloads, no more difficult than 35 was, only by each frame by frame. Metering; also using spot meter and zone system makes shots arrive spot on, no waste. Thus no big number of shots to review and process. Simply an amazing tool. Now is still an age where we have ample choices of FILM. Nope not as many as used to, but still ample. It is a joy to still use FILM. Am I definite heading back to film? It is tempting to say yes, but no... (I confess) because I simply do not want to give up my Aptus 65 either. They are different. I am current designing a custom made sliding adapter for it to use on my Shen-Hao, but... guess what... it will be far simpler to use FILM Quickloads. Then again... just different tools...

Regards
Anders
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5140


« Reply #54 on: February 26, 2009, 11:28:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
Film is still pretty big in Japan, I would say that a majority of serious landscape shooters still use film on medium format bodies.
Maybe this meshes with the recent release of a new medium format film option, Ektar:
1. Enthusiasts with medium and large format equipment might be more like to stay with film than 35mm film camera users, since the cost of digital medium format is far higher, and many are probably unwilling to sacrifice advantages like lens quality over smaller format, or to accept having to replace all their lenses and bodies and adopt the different working style of a digital system in a smaller format.
2. Relatedly, there now seem to be more good quality MF film camera models than good quality 35mm film SLRs on the market! Major brand 35mm film SLRs are down to the Canon EOS-1v, Nikon F6 and Leica R9; the rest is made by Vivitar and such (including the Vivitar product sold as the Nikon FM10.)
3. Japan seems to have a stronger tradition of medium format usage than many places.


These together suggest that in Japan, a greater number of enthusiasts will stay with film, for the sake of staying with medium format.

They also suggests that it makes sense for the "film rear-guard activity" to concentrate on medium and large formats, while de-emphasizing 35mm format.


P. S. I would not be surprised if Canon and Nikon have already made their last 35mm film cameras, with those remaining high end models staying available only due to the last batches not having sold out yet. The F5 was rumored to have been out of production for several years before its official discontinuation.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2009, 11:32:23 AM by BJL » Logged
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001


WWW
« Reply #55 on: February 26, 2009, 11:38:09 AM »
ReplyReply

No wonder.  35mm photography is been truly surpassed by digital. MF still holds a few advantages over digital, but mainly for its different looks. For the smoothest transitions and super resolution, large format is still king. But if you have $40K to spare..............
Eduardo


These together suggest that in Japan, a greater number of enthusiasts will stay with film, for the sake of staying with medium format.

They also suggests that it makes sense for the "film rear-guard activity" to concentrate on medium and large formats, while de-emphasizing 35mm format.


Logged
epatsellis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #56 on: February 26, 2009, 11:54:22 AM »
ReplyReply

LF digital needn't cost $40K, in fact if you shoot product and don't have a need for images larger than 8 1/2x11, a Phase One Studiokit (~$400-$750) will work just fine, granted a scan back requires contiuous (and lots) of lighting, but if you need movements, it's the least expensive way to have digital capture in LF. Larger than 8 1/2 x 11 require upsampling, I regularly upsample to a double truck (11x17) and it still looks better than an image shot with a Dslr, due to the lack of an AA filter.

erie
« Last Edit: February 26, 2009, 11:55:25 AM by epatsellis » Logged
jing q
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« Reply #57 on: February 26, 2009, 09:11:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
Have you even read what I wrote above?

This image was posted in the context of a comment explaining that many people in Japan had the feeling the digital images had a hard time dealing with smooth transitions in skies. That's it. Nothing more.

I still shoot slide film myself on 4x5 from time to time and like it for what it is. I have nothing against shooting film, I am just saying that some of the reasons why people are not considering digital in Japan are simply not valid anymore.

the reason why people shoot film in japan goes beyond the issues of smooth skies.
if you've seen some of the film they shoot in japan (fuji has film there that you don't get overseas) and the kind of textures and colour palettes you get out of the films, you wouldn't see a need to spend hours in front of a computer going through tons of photos on a screen.

Frankly the joyful part of shooting film is the giving up of full control to variables and other people.
We don't need to be in control of everything, and colour palettes of different films are fun to play with.

ironically I've only shot a few rolls of film in the past year but this thread is making me nostalgic again..
Logged
david o
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 310



WWW
« Reply #58 on: February 26, 2009, 09:21:52 PM »
ReplyReply

it feels so much that it wouldn't take a lot for a lot to drop digital...
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8074



WWW
« Reply #59 on: February 26, 2009, 11:35:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jing q
the reason why people shoot film in japan goes beyond the issues of smooth skies.
if you've seen some of the film they shoot in japan (fuji has film there that you don't get overseas) and the kind of textures and colour palettes you get out of the films, you wouldn't see a need to spend hours in front of a computer going through tons of photos on a screen.

Agreed, that's the first point I mentioned above. Regardless of whether this is true or not, this is indeed how people feel about it.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad