Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Who's still shooting film?  (Read 18978 times)
EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2427



WWW
« Reply #80 on: December 18, 2012, 10:20:34 PM »
ReplyReply

I think going back to shooting film is helping me revisit how I like the look of my files.  I think its very beneficial to be able to shoot both.  No question I am spending more time on the film than the digital files on a per image basis, but I shoot way more digital files. I'll have several hundred digital files and maybe 6 LF sheets and one or two rolls of 120.

Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #81 on: December 19, 2012, 03:34:58 AM »
ReplyReply

I think going back to shooting film is helping me revisit how I like the look of my files.  I think its very beneficial to be able to shoot both.   No question I am spending more time on the film than the digital files on a per image basis, but I shoot way more digital files. I'll have several hundred digital files and maybe 6 LF sheets and one or two rolls of 120.





I have to agree 100% with that sentiment.

I came into digital after my working life had pretty much ended, and my feeling has usually been that it was mainly the 'feel' of film, its cameras, the processes that drew me to the medium. It can truthfully be said that that first print coming to life in the tray was a life-setter. It really did represent creation, as in something from nothing (I appreciate that's not technically the case; spiritually, for me, it was).

Regarding digital production, however, the ability to print wet, in both b/w and colour, to a high professional standard made it a non-question as to what one should be aiming for with a digital print or on-screen picture: the experience and a sophisticated sense of what's possible was already instilled long, long ago in the darkroom. That background was an invaluable aid. Without it, I doubt that I'd have started messing with digital or even continued. In fact, looking at some digital reproductions on the Web, I do get the impression that there are perhaps better visual artists out there than good printers of their own work; in other words, I see many poor productions of good shots.

I guess that all experiences add up.

Rob C
Logged

jon404
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #82 on: December 19, 2012, 03:41:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Amateur, Pentax 645N. Why? The camera just feels good. Good to hold, good to use. Ambivalent these days about digital. Retired now (multimedia designer, illustrator), not in a hurry anymore. Shooting film is slow, but then, so am I these days. Expect that 120 film will be around for at least 10 more years... we'll see.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #83 on: December 19, 2012, 05:52:26 AM »
ReplyReply

One of the many reasons I still shoot film is large format.

8x10 Film:

Logged
patrickfransdesmet
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


« Reply #84 on: December 20, 2012, 05:16:53 AM »
ReplyReply

aaaaaah

the beauty of 8x10
simply breathtaking !

I must advise everyone, to visit the photography museum in Belgium, Charleroi,
where you can find a large collection of fine art prints

I get emotionally touched by prints, made on film and fiber base baryta paper
I do not get this feeling from digital

Must be me ...


Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #85 on: December 20, 2012, 08:33:18 AM »
ReplyReply

aaaaaah

the beauty of 8x10
simply breathtaking !

I must advise everyone, to visit the photography museum in Belgium, Charleroi,
where you can find a large collection of fine art prints

I get emotionally touched by prints, made on film and fiber base baryta paper
I do not get this feeling from digital

Must be me ...




I think this is true.  Film can be a dream world.  The imperfections and limitations drive you forward, as in life.  Its a different dimension to image making.  I'm not knocking digital, but digital's brief is PERFECTION and EASE.  This is nothing like life, it is what an advertisement for life looks like.  This accounts, perhaps, for the distance.  This is not to say that digital can't express or convey emotion, just look at photo journalism.  Its almost all digital and in many cases VERY compelling.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #86 on: December 20, 2012, 09:18:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Film while limited in certain ways is quite unlimited in other. 8x10inch image circles being one of them, creating an immersive depth even with one simple light.

The nature of the lens, the fact that the image is never miniaturized in the workflow.

The way fine detail fades smoothly into the film grain.... it's a different story to digital.

Digital has put great image detail into small packets, but it has left behind the beauty of most of medium format and all of large format.

Here is what I mean about fine detail....




« Last Edit: December 20, 2012, 09:49:09 PM by FredBGG » Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #87 on: December 20, 2012, 10:03:26 PM »
ReplyReply

aaaaaah

the beauty of 8x10
simply breathtaking !

I must advise everyone, to visit the photography museum in Belgium, Charleroi,
where you can find a large collection of fine art prints

I get emotionally touched by prints, made on film and fiber base baryta paper
I do not get this feeling from digital

Must be me ...




Thanks!

I often go over to the Panavision offices where they have George Hurrell prints in the halls.

They are simply breathtaking.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7647


WWW
« Reply #88 on: December 21, 2012, 12:14:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Tim Parkin sent me an Mamiya 7 Image from the same test. If you measure MTF it would outspace IQ180 with some margin. But thinks are not that simple. Tim scans on drum at 10000 PPI. The best scans I have are at 6096 PPI, but they would come in at 200 each at official price. Drum scans are not exactly cheap. Also, digital images are smoother, no grain. If you enlarge a digital image it just fells apart.

Regarding Pentax 645D it is awesome with good lenses, but according to Lloyd Chambers testing most lenses are not that good. Nevertheless, I have seen a lot of perfectly good P645 images.

What I have seen is that when scanning my Pentax 67 slides on my Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro I get about the same resolution for high contrast detail as on the 24 MP Sony Alpha 900 I have. Image quality wise I regard the Alpha to be much better.

Best regards
Erik


Film while limited in certain ways is quite unlimited in other. 8x10inch image circles being one of them, creating an immersive depth even with one simple light.

The nature of the lens, the fact that the image is never miniaturized in the workflow.

The way fine detail fades smoothly into the film grain.... it's a different story to digital.

Digital has put great image detail into small packets, but it has left behind the beauty of most of medium format and all of large format.

Here is what I mean about fine detail....





Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #89 on: December 21, 2012, 12:39:10 AM »
ReplyReply

.....Also, digital images are smoother, no grain. If you enlarge a digital image it just fells apart.....
Best regards
Erik

Digital sensor while clean in some aspects are a pain in the ass in others.

No sensor moire problems with film. Grain has a magic way of avoiding banding if you need to heavily process an image.
Film defects tend to look more pleasant than digital artifacts.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #90 on: December 21, 2012, 06:45:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Digital sensor while clean in some aspects are a pain in the ass in others.

No sensor moire problems with film. Grain has a magic way of avoiding banding if you need to heavily process an image.
Film defects tend to look more pleasant than digital artifacts.



But Ektachrome wasn't without faults, either: I remember shooting two very similar leather jackets, one a pale blue and the other a pale greenish tone. When the film came back I couldn't tell which was which. The day was saved because I still had the jackets in the studio and the buttons were different, so I knew which to label as which.

I'm not really sure about moire: I seem to be familiar with it from before 'enjoying' the digital experience, but without having any precise memory of why it seems a familiar concept - maybe I saw it in film?

Rob C
Logged

artobest
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


WWW
« Reply #91 on: December 21, 2012, 06:56:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Rob, you probably saw moire in half-tone reproductions in books and magazines. It predates digital for sure, but you won't find it being caused by film.
Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #92 on: December 21, 2012, 11:33:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Rob, you probably saw moire in half-tone reproductions in books and magazines. It predates digital for sure, but you won't find it being caused by film.

Yup... it wasn't the photographers problem.

However digital moire can be used to your advantage if there is a moire caused by two layers of fabric.
IF you scale the subject on the sensor while shooting to just the right size you can bet the camera color moire
to coincide with the dual fabric moire and use the color information of the moire to correct the luma moire caused by the fabric.
Logged
carloalberto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« Reply #93 on: December 21, 2012, 07:25:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Very technically proficient as well as doing more then full justice to the beautiful subjects.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #94 on: December 21, 2012, 08:27:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Fuji GX680 and Plus-X-Pan



I should have shot a fraction of a second later, but I had to run before getting soaked....
Logged
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 653


« Reply #95 on: December 22, 2012, 10:17:29 PM »
ReplyReply

I often go over to the Panavision offices where they have George Hurrell prints in the halls.

They are simply breathtaking.

Undoubtedly Hurrell's work remains amongst the greatest of the all time but you can't just credit film and large format for the amazing look he captured. He spent hours hand retouching his negs on the base side with pencil and pastels, effectively taking away sharpness.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #96 on: December 23, 2012, 04:12:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Undoubtedly Hurrell's work remains amongst the greatest of the all time but you can't just credit film and large format for the amazing look he captured. He spent hours hand retouching his negs on the base side with pencil and pastels, effectively taking away sharpness.

Hurrell embraced the art of retouching. He preferred his subjects to have little foundation and powder preferring to retouch.
However film and the format he used were instrumental to his style. I have seen prints prior to retouching and they are beautiful..
in some ways I like them even more. Some of his nicest work is not retouched to the smoothness that was the look of his mainstream work.

Here is one for example:
« Last Edit: December 23, 2012, 04:17:15 AM by FredBGG » Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #97 on: December 23, 2012, 05:11:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Who's still shooting film?

Spent the day developing film....
Sometimes I just love it... the process...
Choosing the developer to use....
Mixing...
Checking temp...
Aggitation....
Loading the rolls...
watching the last cloudiness go away as the fixer does the job..
Looking at the rolls as they dry ..
I enjoy all the good music I listen to in the process...
today it was Ania Dąbrowska
http://youtu.be/OOGOMm2NkDg
http://youtu.be/vUgpNwWff6I

and R L Burnside
http://youtu.be/DsfZ1N-s-qM

Sometimes I can't wait for the film to dry so I have a mini light box and I set my
cell phone to shoot negative and I take snaps of the negatives still drying..

here's one from today:



Shooting film is like cooking a fine meal. Digital however magnificent it is still somewhat feels like heating up
junk food in a microwave Wink...... just kidding

Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #98 on: December 23, 2012, 11:01:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred, that's almost as bad as smoking whilst you print!

I used to work in a darkroom of five of us, and all smoked. The poor girl who did the spotting used to get overtime. Cruel stuff or cool, depending on whether she needed the money.

The Polish chick has a nice video - the first one - and as for the last link to Burnside, I'm a sucker for blues.
But none of it, for me, is for working. For that, I prefer swamp pop rock or straight Chuck Berry. Music that's emotion and not message-based is better when your head has to be someplace else.

It's like driving: I often wonder if I even noticed the lights, but I guess I did or I wouldn't be writing this. When working, I seldom know which song I just heard, but am quite aware of the one playing.

Isn't photography something else?

http://youtu.be/3jLn1_shQXQ

Rob C

Logged

bucko
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #99 on: December 23, 2012, 09:48:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I still use Velvia 50, 35mm. Anyone else?

bucko
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad