Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Going backwards...  (Read 115410 times)
gr82bart
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 83



WWW
« Reply #20 on: December 29, 2005, 09:48:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Amen Digiteyesed. There are no film or digital buffs, as some would label so hastily, just photography buffs. You're just starting on a great discovery, so I wish you all the best.

Regards, Art.
Logged

Visit my website at www.ArtLiem.com or my online portfolios at APUG and Model Mayhem
Digiteyesed
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 159


WWW
« Reply #21 on: December 29, 2005, 09:52:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I never meant to imply that you were one of the people I was referring to. There's absolutely nothing wrong with riding horses just because you like to. Nor is there anything wrong with shooting film for the same reason.

Sorry, I guess I should been more careful with my phrasing. I never saw you as attacking my choice of film and I'm sorry if I seem to have singled you out in my reply -- I just wanted to clarify where I stand on the whole film/digital thing. :-)
Logged

Neutral Hills Stills
A visual journey through this unique area of East Central Alberta, Canada.
lightandimages
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #22 on: December 29, 2005, 10:02:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Well.. I learned in a wet room and I truely miss the smells and the different papers etc. While I love digital, it's very "sterile" in the tactile department.

When it came time to teach my then 13 year old how to shoot real pictures, I loaded her up with my old CanonAE1 and B/W film. She took the film and into the blackbag we went with the reels and tanks. I bought a used enlarger and we went through how to develop negatives and print contact sheets. The look on her face when the blank paper started to fill in was priceless.

Even though she is digital now too, she talks fondly about learning how to develop film and make real prints.

I think it is as much as touching our roots as it is anything else.

MikeS
Logged
Frere Jacques
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


WWW
« Reply #23 on: December 30, 2005, 07:54:46 AM »
ReplyReply

>It was digital technology that made me go nuts over photography, but the more I play
>with film -- especially B&W -- the more I love it. Go figure.

If you haven't already, order some Ilford Pan-F 50 -- beautiful film! The images captured have a rich, silky quality to them that I find extraordinary. I shot Kodak for years, but I really prefer the Ilford films below ISO 400. Now I am trying to hunt down an Efke distributor in France...
Logged
bob mccarthy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 372


WWW
« Reply #24 on: December 30, 2005, 10:26:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
>It was digital technology that made me go nuts over photography, but the more I play
>with film -- especially B&W -- the more I love it. Go figure.

If you haven't already, order some Ilford Pan-F 50 -- beautiful film! The images captured have a rich, silky quality to them that I find extraordinary. I shot Kodak for years, but I really prefer the Ilford films below ISO 400. Now I am trying to hunt down an Efke distributor in France...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=54742\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you want to really get the sense of B&W, step up to larger formats i.e. 4.5x6 or better yet 6x7. Light years from 35mm.

4x5 is another huge step up from there.

I'm getting a .... never mind, thinking about it.

I am missing my darkroom. I just sold my home and moving to a smaller downsized townhouse. Kids are all gone. Guess what goes... groan. Like the end of an era. I don't use it much, but don't like the idea I can't.


bob
Logged
Richowens
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 837



« Reply #25 on: January 01, 2006, 01:12:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think part of the reason that I'm falling in love with film is that the journey (making the image) is as enjoyable for me as arriving at the destination (the final image). I find that using film slows me down and makes me appreciate each discrete step in the image making process that much more. I'm hoping that my adventures in my new darkroom will only add to my enjoyment of each image I create.

I like to think of shooting with my RB67 as "stopping to smell the roses".  My mind slows down and things are done in a more relaxed manner.

Enjoy shooting film and I look forward to seeing the results of your journey.

Rich
Logged

Anon E. Mouse
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 197


WWW
« Reply #26 on: January 17, 2006, 06:49:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I do understand your hesitation on posting on darkrooms. I get the feeling this is an "anti-film" site. Especially with the articles like "Clumps and Chumps." (Pretty derogotory title as well.) No offence to Micheal. He obviously has found some magic in digital photography, and that is fine. He can also do what he likes on his own site. Of course, with folks bashing themselves over the head to "prove" the "superiority" of their way of taking pictures, you can only expect each side to be defensive. But I don't think Luminous Landscapes forum is the place to come for information on film technology (just look at the cob webs in the Wet Darkroom forum), but it is a great source of information for digital.

I use both film and digital. Nothing wrong with either. It is a matter of what compromises you are willing to put up with - neither is a panacea.

I enjoy darkroom work, both color and black and white. I run my own darkroom at home. It certainly is not a step backwards and it can be lots of fun if you enjoy the work. I particularly like printing.
Logged
mikeseb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 482



WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 17, 2006, 09:54:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I get the feeling this is an "anti-film" site. Especially with the articles like "Clumps and Chumps." (Pretty derogotory title as well.)

I respectfully disagree on this point. Since this is Michael's site and he's a confirmed digeratus, it's not surprising that LL focuses on digital photography. He has his opinions about the relative technical standing of either medium, upon which reasonable people can disagree. That said, there's a lot here that is helpful and interesting even to those of us who straddle both worlds, or <gasp> shoot film only. I have never felt that this site is anti-film, just pro-digital and live-and-let-live. As for Clumps and Chumps, I took it as a snarky quip, and find it insufficient to prompt panty-wadding.

However, I did mean to ask about the silver-halide-sniffing dogs at the Toronto Brickworks photo shoot....I thought Canadians were supposed to be polite!  They'll never guess where I keep the Plus-X hidden.
Logged

michael sebastian
Website  |  Blog
dazzajl
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71


« Reply #28 on: January 20, 2006, 12:37:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Why couldn't I just stay out of here.    

I really miss my darkroom.

Oh and I'm one of the oddballs that still has room for both. Work is digital, 100% but when I shoot for me, it's film. Why? Because the journey is often more important than the destination.  
Logged
jeffball
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


WWW
« Reply #29 on: January 20, 2006, 04:04:56 PM »
ReplyReply

I, too, am going back to the future.  For me, it is not about capture, it is about the  print.  While I love my color printing on Matte paper, I really enjoy the traditional BW silver/selenium toned print.  Now, BW is a recent endeavor for me.  I have two Wynn Bullock prints from the Brooks Jensen digital reproduction/silver prints and they are my benchmarks.  I recently viewed an Uelsman exhibit and was blown away by what he had done in the darkroom.  I am going to convert a 2200 to Peizography with QTR, but I am pretty sure that I will move to a darkroom.  Heck, darkrooms can be had for free!  I guess I am a little weary of the "technology chase."  My one-year-old 7600 is now inferior to the K3 inks and their BW capabilities with IP6.0 (another $1,500, not counting the maintenance contract).   I can make nice BW prints with QTR on the 7600 and Moab Entrada, but it is not the look I am going for artistically.  Yes, for color-inkjet/mat is wonderful and very appealing to me.  I am not sure about BW.  I value greatly the opinion of Joseph Holmes and he does write very favorably about the x800 series..more about its color potential, but still praises BW.  But is this the trend, trade up every two years for a new improved inkjet?  I am very concerned that it can become that way and I simply don't have the time or financial resources to engage in that pursuit.  The time I spend reading the internet about "what I am missing" with the latest technologies I could spend in the darkroom creating prints.  As I reflect on the photographers who's work I enjoy the most, it is the traditional darkroom artists that capture my mind and heart.  Just another photographer captured initially by digital and going backwards in time...for what its worth.
Logged

Graham Welland
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 610


« Reply #30 on: January 22, 2006, 01:22:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Sometimes I enjoy the process of shooting film with my Wista DX - it's a much slower process, involves use of grads & filters, waiting for the results and lugging around a not insignificant amount of camera gear. However, as someone who doesn't do this for a living, it's a pleasant way of enjoying and improving my camera craft. I leave the colour chemical processing to others and I'm happy to pick up the finished slides.

For the other 99% of my photography, I enjoy the convenience and instant feedback of shooting digitally with the D2X and 645M or taking grab shots with the P&S. The results are at least as good and many more shots make their way to final print. However, I always carry the film outfit in the car and dual shoot when those special opportunities present themselves. (I think of my 4x4 as the camera bag   )

I think Jonathan's analogy here of horse vs. car/truck is spot on. In my case I'd probably also compare shooting film vs. digital to sailing with a sailboat vs. a motor cruiser, etc.

As regards Michael as anti-film: when did that happen? Anyone who has followed LL over the years would see that there's been a transition from all film through the adoption of ever better digital technologies and techniques but I've never seen anything to suggest an anti-film bias. A pro-digital bias sure, but never an anti-film one (and they are definitely different things!).
Logged

Graham
r42ogn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 47



« Reply #31 on: January 26, 2006, 11:14:41 AM »
ReplyReply

It's a tough one.  I loved getting back into the B&W darkroom over the last year, got me away from the computer I also work on and mixing with new people - but then I scratched several key frames in an unfamiliar negative carrier (it's not my darkroom) and got very annoyed that I hadn't used digital.  More than anything for me the alure of film is using a manual rangefinder with a single prime lens that is so different from the digital sports work I'd been doing, no batteries or lenses to lug around, little chance of being mugged for a $200 second hand camera, no choice but to take care over every shot.  As many people have said, once you get away from purely professional considerations, it's horses for courses (at the risk of bringing horses into the debate again).

One point of very slight issue, digital is not quite as cheap as it first seemed, at least for me.  I've had a microdrive pack up on me ($150 cost), a card reader fail ($30), I've had to add 120GB of hardfile to my PC ($80) plus a DVD recorder for back up ($70+a lot of media) and all my original 4 rechargeable canon battery packs are not holding their charge at all well after 2 years ($100+? to replace) plus the depreciation on the camera is pretty rapid.  Now for my 10,000+ frames of sports the digital is CHEAP, but not free.

Appreciate most of you are professionals working to a different beat, but that's my perspective.
Logged
DonWeston
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 148


« Reply #32 on: January 26, 2006, 02:34:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Cheap, heck no, not cheap. I recently looked back at my hobby expense over the last 5 years of going digital. Started with a D30 and many dslrs since and currently a D200 kit and lens, totalled out to over $30k. This being a paultry sum compared to many others in these forums I know. For me a hobbyist it is still a considerable amount. But it allows me to get quality that my Hasselblad and LF gear and many hours in the darkroom achieved only after much work. Don't get me started on getting a second perfect print after the first one, 12 hours later or 48hrs. But, and it is a big but, what else would I be doing.....hehe. Now I am totally smitten with digital darkroom and for me, health issues, stopped me from enjoying what was 35 yrs of wet darkroom fun. I would not, could not go back. That is to say to the darkroom, but film is another issue, and you certainly can still obtain some of the beauty of film even by scanning it and printing with my 7600. The consistency issue that occurred with the wet darkroom is now solved, file saved, backed up repeatedly, different format and media thanks to both dvds and LaCie External Hard drives in both my home and office. Security that never existed alone in the film and wet darkroom environment, now practically assured. Is digital perfect or the only object, NO, but nothing is, but with health issues, 50+ year old eyes, AF is certainly appreciated and the fun is back...now where is that spare 50 grand for the H2D and 39 MP back, lenses.....oh my poor back..well the wallet will be lighter, that will help.
Logged
Dil
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4



« Reply #33 on: March 24, 2006, 04:37:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey! My first post!  The past four years has seen me pouring time and finance into re-learning photography. "All is digital now, I'll never use my trusty Bronica ETRS or Nikon FE again" I believed.
A growing family had taken up the space formerly occupied by my darkroom while the benefits of Photoshop were being enjoyed by the children as well as myself.

But...a friend who is newly enthused by photography offered to house and use my darkroom gear in return for my having access to it (unless I wished to sell it to him of course). Suddenly the possibilities re-awakened all sorts of emotions in me. Once more I'll be able to experience the magic of a print appearing in the dev tray, the aroma of Stop Bath and being involved in a process the workings of which I can actually comprehend! This most wonderful of hobbies is blessed with great traditions and an exciting future. I have resolved to partake of both.

Now where did I put that Lightroom tutorial disc?
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7852



WWW
« Reply #34 on: March 24, 2006, 07:47:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, I've sometimes thought of putting a tray of stop bath next to my monitor, just to have the smell of a real darkroom. Now, if only someone would come up with a Photoshop plugin that would first show your image as a blank, white screen until you jiggle the monitor back and forth ("agitate" it), whereupon the image would very gradually emerge, being fully "developed" in about 90 seconds . . .  

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Anon E. Mouse
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 197


WWW
« Reply #35 on: March 24, 2006, 11:18:32 PM »
ReplyReply

You would need a LIQUID chrystal display.
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7852



WWW
« Reply #36 on: March 25, 2006, 05:05:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You would need a LIQUID chrystal display.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60978\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Ouch!

Yup. And I've often wondered how long I need to wash my LCD after making a print in PS if I want my prints to be archival.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7854



WWW
« Reply #37 on: March 29, 2006, 10:36:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ouch!

Yup. And I've often wondered how long I need to wash my LCD after making a print in PS if I want my prints to be archival.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61004\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I wonder what happens if Windows crashes at that time?...

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Orgnoi1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


WWW
« Reply #38 on: July 10, 2006, 05:18:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry for digging up the post a little... but I am somewhat in the same boat. I shoot a lot of digital as a part-time working pro. I recently got back into film a slight bit and decided to go with a MF camera to play around and slow down. This post isnt meant to bring up old arguments, or tell people how to think or what to shoot. Its meant to say that while I love shooting digital, there is just something that brings out the kid in me when it comes to shooting larger than 35mm frame film. Medium format was just the way of enabling those kid-like feelings, and anticipation. For those that down-talk film, I am sorry you feel that way.
Logged

[span style='color:red']TRJ Photography[/span]
National Press Photographers Assn. Member (NPPA)
[span style='color:red']Canon[/span] 1D Mark II/20D/1nRS/Pro-1
500[span style='color:red']L[/span], 100-400[span style='color:red']L[/span], 70-200[span style='color:red']L[/span] IS, 24-70[span style='color:red']L[/span], 100 Macro, 50/1.8, 17-35/2.8-4
[span style='color:blue']Mamiya[/span] M645 TL Pro
Sekor C 45/2.8, 55/2.8, 80/2.8 N/L, 55-110/4.5, 145/4 Soft Focus, 150/3.5

Are you a photographer in the North East? Click to visit our website!!
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7852



WWW
« Reply #39 on: July 10, 2006, 07:34:15 PM »
ReplyReply

My own comments weren't meant to denigrate film or film users but rather to admit, with some chagrin, that I, too, have "gone over to the dark side" of digital. It is fun, and it lets me do things I never could with film. But film definitely let me do things I could never do with digital. I still have a Mamiya 6 which I expect to get back to any day now. And I have a terrific darkroom, which has been gathering dust for the past couple of years, while I play this new game of digital.

Many years ago I found film developing to be the most boring part of photography, but in recent years I have come to appreciate the quiet times in total dark, swishing neagtives in a tray or tilting a developing tank periodically. That gave me time for serious meditation, and I don't get that with Photoshop.

Digital and film to me are two different, but related, media. I hope and expect they will both have long and healthy futures.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad