Forced to make the move...

jemdna

jemdna

Suspended / Banned
Messages
856
Name
Bryan
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey :|

Well yesterday was a bit of a crap day, due to finances, I had to sell my D50 and associated gear to one of those crap second hand shops as a means to a quick fix. (I know I know I could of got more here etc but here involves a few days turn around time, time I didn't have)

This ushers in a new era of my photography, I am now a film photographer only, digital has GONE :eek:

Now I am seeing this as a great oppertunity to get some work done, and a way to push my game to make me truly think about each frame before firing. Just not sure I was quite ready to loose digital :help:

I have a photoshoot in a few days for a group called "Biker-Babes" (Group of girls who act as stewards at a local bike rally) and I'm going for a bit of a gritty feel to it all. I am going to check the venue out tommorow night so lets hope I have a clue what I'm doing by then?

The film I've got in my bag currently...

Ilford Delta 3200 Professional (36EXP)
FujicolorC200 (36EXP)
Ilford XP2 (36EXP)

Ahh well thats my brain rant for the day done :clap::wave::wave:

Bry
 
Digital photography is not the holy grail, film photography will give you more fulfillment and make you a better photographer.

Others will not agree with that, just my slant on things.
Good luck with your new venture
 
Cheers for the luck Bill :) I know Digital isn't the holy grail, It just something of a "Safety net" where by I could at least partially review how a shoot is going in real time :lol:

By the way, PLEASE do not turn this into film V digital, the members in this area are quite often under the influence of dev' chemicals and so might not be the most patient of people...or infact sane...
 
jemdna said:
By the way, PLEASE do not turn this into film V digital, the members in this area are quite often under the influence of dev' chemicals and so might not be the most patient of people...or infact sane...
Click to expand...


Well I don't mind as it is interesting what can be achieved with a 35mm DSLR and SLR as long as it's all sensible, for example:- does digital have more problems with some colours or shadows or highlights compared to film(BTW a rhetorical question).
As a film user, a small part of my hobby is "giant killing" trying to equal an expensive DSLR and lens for IQ, with my out of date film and under £25 lenses, and supermarket development and scan, and at times some help from photoshop.
 
gingerjon said:
Nice mix!
Click to expand...

Cheers :) Hoping the 3200 stuff should really give me some "Gritty" Images for the biker shots, the rest of the film is just a test really to see what I like :)

excalibur2 said:
Well I don't mind as it is interesting what can be achieved with a 35mm DSLR and SLR as long as it's all sensible, for example:- does digital have more problems with some colours or shadows or highlights compared to film(BTW a rhetorical question).
As a film user, a small part of my hobby is "giant killing" trying to equal an expensive DSLR and lens for IQ, with my out of date film and under £25 lenses, and supermarket development and scan, and at times some help from photoshop.
Click to expand...

I too like the idea of giant killing, I mean cmon, look at my camera bag :lol:I know that film is more than capable of doing what I need, its more confidence in my own abilities to be able to get the best out of 35mm

Bry
 
jemdna said:
Cheers :) Hoping the 3200 stuff should really give me some "Gritty" Images for the biker shots, the rest of the film is just a test really to see what I like :)
Click to expand...

I used some TMax 3200 on a walkabout in daytime earlier this year and the grain is awesome. Actually have some loaded in right now and was wondering what to do -- I think I'll take it to a market tomorrow and get some 'action' shots.

It's FP4 after that - other end of the scale!
 
***I too like the idea of giant killing, I mean cmon, look at my camera bag I know that film is more than capable of doing what I need, its more confidence in my own abilities to be able to get the best out of 35mm***

...and ATM film can be superior to digital in that a film user can buy and use medium format gear at a reasonable price, but how many digital guys can afford medium format digital gear to compete.......a scanned medium format neg oozes quality.
 
You probably know this Bryan but I thought I'd point it out just in case that Delta3200 is more like ISO1000 but can be pushed to 3200 when required (or so I've read).
 
excalibur2 said:
.......a scanned medium format neg oozes quality.
Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:I dare you to look at my hard disk, it will offer evidence to the contrary m'lud. Under exposed slides and an Epson4490 are not a quality combination.
 
Kev M said:
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:I dare you to look at my hard disk, it will offer evidence to the contrary m'lud. Under exposed slides and an Epson4490 are not a quality combination.
Click to expand...

What! You are undermining the MF shooters argument :-)
 
Kev M said:
You probably know this Bryan but I thought I'd point it out just in case that Delta3200 is more like ISO1000 but can be pushed to 3200 when required (or so I've read).
Click to expand...

Yes... Yes I knew that... :help::lol:

What on earth would I do without you lot?! I see im definitely going to need to some more reading up on film choices :lol:

Bry
 
excalibur2 said:
What! You are undermining the MF shooters argument :-)
Click to expand...

Nah, just pointing out that even with the magnificence that is MF some people (me) can still produce the photographic equivalent of turds.
 
Kev M said:
You probably know this Bryan but I thought I'd point it out just in case that Delta3200 is more like ISO1000 but can be pushed to 3200 when required (or so I've read).
Click to expand...

Worth pointing out that I think the DX coding is for 3200 (as it is for TMax) so if your camera sets automatically that's what it will think it's shooting.
 
Kev M said:
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:I dare you to look at my hard disk, it will offer evidence to the contrary m'lud. Under exposed slides and an Epson4490 are not a quality combination.
Click to expand...

Well - I'd give you an argument on one of those counts Kev... Whilst you may have a few on the disk that aren't 100%, pretty much anything I've seen you post on here has been something I'd have been pretty much chuffed with.

I'm with you in spirit on the rest though - Under Exposed anything and a flatbed scanner aren't happy bedfellows. And when it comes to the crunch, the most important part of the picture taking process isn't the camera, it isn't the medium the shots recorded on (35mm, MF, 5x4, 10x8 or (whisper it) Dijikal), it's that nut behind the camera that makes or breaks the picture. So when it's a talentless nerk like me in charge of the shutter, I could be stood behind a Hasselblad or a Holga, it won't make a ha'porth of difference - i'll still have missed the camera was on the wonk, or there's a discarded crisp packet in the foreground i'd missed.

I'll stop now, before I get even more depressed and sell up the whole shebang :(
 
I love film but started with it AFTER digital. Not sure I would like to do a whole shoot on film without the digital there too (like a comfort blanket) but at the lencarta studio day I took a film camera too and was really happy with the results. It's also funny when people want to see the results of a shot and they can't understand where the little colour screen is. I was going to draw a little stick person on some card and stick it into the square plate thing where you can put the end of the film box so you know what you are shooting.
 
jemdna said:
Hey :|

Well yesterday was a bit of a crap day, due to finances, I had to sell my D50 and associated gear to one of those crap second hand shops as a means to a quick fix. (I know I know I could of got more here etc but here involves a few days turn around time, time I didn't have)

This ushers in a new era of my photography, I am now a film photographer only, digital has GONE :eek:

Now I am seeing this as a great oppertunity to get some work done, and a way to push my game to make me truly think about each frame before firing. Just not sure I was quite ready to loose digital :help:

I have a photoshoot in a few days for a group called "Biker-Babes" (Group of girls who act as stewards at a local bike rally) and I'm going for a bit of a gritty feel to it all. I am going to check the venue out tommorow night so lets hope I have a clue what I'm doing by then?

The film I've got in my bag currently...

Ilford Delta 3200 Professional (36EXP)
FujicolorC200 (36EXP)
Ilford XP2 (36EXP)

Ahh well thats my brain rant for the day done :clap::wave::wave:

Bry
Click to expand...

Bryan,

Kit's replaceable, possessions come and go, key is just enjoying what you have. Back in the day, I did quite a few photo-jobs with the fore-runner of your Yashica - the 108. I remember one of them was a "Grip and Grin" job - 300 blokes at a "Sportsmans Dinner" all queueing up to have a photo taken with some footballer or something before eating a second rate meal and drinking heavily to a off-colour speech. I guess what I'm saying is that film was good enough for years, and yes - given my choice, if i was doing that now, i'd be shooting digital, i''d not bat an eyelid about taking it on with the EOS-3 and a bagful of film, if the need arose.

You've still got cameras, it sounds like you've still got the love of shooting, and you've got a bunch of people here, who'll help out if needed. :thumbs:
 
cowasaki said:
...It's also funny when people want to see the results of a shot and they can't understand where the little colour screen is. I was going to draw a little stick person on some card and stick it into the square plate thing where you can put the end of the film box so you know what you are shooting.
Click to expand...

pmsl - now that's something I'll HAVE TO DO!
 
excalibur2 said:
***I too like the idea of giant killing, I mean cmon, look at my camera bag I know that film is more than capable of doing what I need, its more confidence in my own abilities to be able to get the best out of 35mm***

...and ATM film can be superior to digital in that a film user can buy and use medium format gear at a reasonable price, but how many digital guys can afford medium format digital gear to compete.......a scanned medium format neg oozes quality.
Click to expand...

The new digital back for the older Hasselblads is only about £1000, I think I saw yesterday...fits on a 500C - I'm sorely tempted...
A good MF scanner is what?
The Nikon SUPER COOLSCAN 9000 is listed at about £2,400 in most places.

You can do it cheaper, sure, but are you really getting the best out of that MF negative or transparency using a sub-standard scanner?

As digital technology becomes more widely used, the price drops - niche markets, such as film and film scanners will only get more expensive.
Much as I love film and the buzz that accompanies watching those prints materialise in the dev tray, I must accept that it is dead for any practical or commercial use.

Whereas only six or seven years ago, photo agencies were still demanding medium-format transparencies for magazine use, those days are gone. Clients expect - demand, even - immediate or as close to as makes no difference, viewing of the images...

At college, I learned to make my own glass plates - mixed up the solutions, painted the emulsion onto the glass, exposed then developed them all myself.
It can be done. Commercial photographers in the 1800's did just that. If I felt like it and could convince my GF to let me turn the basement into a chemistry-lab, I could still do it.
Just in the same way that if I really had to I could use a Speed-Graphic to do a press-job, or my Leica M6. Doesn't mean I'd like it much, or that the resulting photos would be any better than if taken on my digital kit...
In fact they'd be worse, digital gives me far more flexibility when it comes to working than film ever did.
I'd have to carry at least three more camera bodies than I now do in order to cover all the bases...

Digital isn't better than film, it's just newer. It's the latest evolution of photography, that's all.

When we talk of the joys of using film cameras, mostly we're still talking about cameras made in the 1980's and 90's. Modern cameras.
Use an M3 against an M6 to see how horrible it is...
Use an F against an F3 to know what frustration is when trying to change film in a hurry...
Develop a film taken on a motorised F2 and realise that the shutter didn't sync with the film-advance properly - again, despite you checking it was set properly...

Digital takes the fear out of a Professional Phoographer's life - and that's no bad thing, as far as I'm concerned.

The argument (is it even an argument?) about film vs digital is moot: it's not about quality. Film will never get any better than it is right now, or has been for the last 10 years.

Affordable digital technology capable of producing film-quality (and that term will be obsolete before very long as well) images has been here for less than a decade. And it's going to keep improving and become more affordable.

A digital-back for a Hasselblad 500c for £1,000 compared to a Nikon film scanner for £2,400...? Why would I still think film was in any way viable as a recording-medium for commercial use?

Even now that technology has plateaued - I went back from a D3x to a D3 as the images from the D3x were too unweildy...
Canon have admitted privately that they will never produce a camera as good as the D3x.

For the hobbyist-user there is no good reason not to keep using film, none whatsoever: It's fun. It requires greater skill to get the best results. It requires discipline to 'get the shot' knowing you only have 36 exposures instead of 1,000-plus captures available. It's what 'real' photographers use - whatever...

But it's got nothing to do with image-quality - if you really think that, then you're just deluding yourselves.
Film may give the user a certain 'look', some indefinable quality that's difficult or impossible for digital to replicate. But so what?

A gum-bichromate print from a wet-collodion plate looks unlike anything I can produce with a roll of HP5, doesn't mean I want to drag that old bellows camera out of the loft...
 
Arkady said:
The new digital back for the older Hasselblads is only about £1000, I think I saw yesterday...fits on a 500C - I'm sorely tempted...
Click to expand...

Sorry Rob, I think you missed a Zero... £10,281

edit: forgot to add, imho, rest of your arguments are perfectly valid, and I'd love something like a D3, but there's no point in having Champagne tastes when you've barely got a Beer budget. Hence, I've got a EOS-3 for the 35mm stuff, and MF is either via a borrowed Bronica or a pinhole Holga :lol:
 
TheBigYin said:
Sorry Rob, I think you missed a Zero... £10,281
Click to expand...

hahaha blows my whole argument into the weeds - "come back in five years and try again, you Muppet"....:lol:

OK, still not so commercially do-able, but then I get MF quality from the D3x, so maybe I'll hold off buying one of those...

The rest is still valid though:
My neg scanner is the 35mm version, so I'm limited to using the Leica and F5 for now...
I'll never go back to having a full darkroom set-up...so digital scanning is the only thing that makes using film in any way worthwhile...
 
Arkady said:
hahaha blows my whole argument into the weeds - "come back in five years and try again, you Muppet"....:lol:

OK, still not so commercially do-able, but then I get MF quality from the D3x, so maybe I'll hold off buying one of those...

The rest is still valid though:
My neg scanner is the 35mm version, so I'm limited to using the Leica and F5 for now...
I'll never go back to having a full darkroom set-up...so digital scanning is the only thing that makes using film in any way worthwhile...
Click to expand...

It's "only" the price of a couple of D3x's though... :shrug: and in a year or so, second hand ??
 
TheBigYin said:
It's "only" the price of a couple of D3x's though... :shrug: and in a year or so, second hand ??
Click to expand...

Exactly - I bought 2 D3x bodies last year, thinking they'd be future-proof for a few years at least and guess what?
Ended up selling one of them to buy a D3s (still on order). I bought another 2nd-hand D3 for £2k, which I use all the time. The only time the D3x comes out is for studio work and portraits where the sitter requires a large print.

I'm still going to hang onto my film kit - out of nostalia as much as anything else...
I couldn't bear to part with my Leica - ever... Just knowing you have arguably the best lens ever made for a 35mm camera sat there is quite gratifying...
 
TheBigYin said:
Well - I'd give you an argument on one of those counts Kev... Whilst you may have a few on the disk that aren't 100%, pretty much anything I've seen you post on here has been something I'd have been pretty much chuffed with.
Click to expand...

I'm flattered mate but trust me, the very little I post up on here probably represents less than .1% of what I shoot. The rest is *****. I went to a group studio shoot, shot 1 roll of Provia400 all day (12 frames) and under exposed the lot (only by a stop but that seems to be enough on slide to make it worthless when scanning). Then spent the next two months on and off trialling various bits of scanner software to try and recover them. Gave up in the end, think I converted them to B&W. Still, they don't look too bad providing you hold the up to a reasonably bright light source like the sun.

Arkady said:
hahaha blows my whole argument into the weeds - "come back in five years and try again, you Muppet"....:lol:

I'll never go back to having a full darkroom set-up...so digital scanning is the only thing that makes using film in any way worthwhile...
Click to expand...

That was a quality fail Rob. £1000 for a digital H back, you can't even get the neck straps for that sort of money can you?;)

If ever you have the desire to get intoxicated on chemicals again you're more than welcome to use my darkroom when you're back over here in exchange for a few nuggets of wisdom.
 
Kev M said:
I'm flattered mate but trust me, the very little I post up on here probably represents less than .1% of what I shoot. The rest is *****. I went to a group studio shoot, shot 1 roll of Provia400 all day (12 frames) and under exposed the lot (only by a stop but that seems to be enough on slide to make it worthless when scanning). Then spent the next two months on and off trialling various bits of scanner software to try and recover them. Gave up in the end, think I converted them to B&W. Still, they don't look too bad providing you hold the up to a reasonably bright light source like the sun.



That was a quality fail Rob. £1000 for a digital H back, you can't even get the neck straps for that sort of money can you?;)

If ever you have the desire to get intoxicated on chemicals again you're more than welcome to use my darkroom when you're back over here in exchange for a few nuggets of wisdom.
Click to expand...

I'll do that: I'll buy a pack of 10x12 Ilford Galerie bromide paper and see what we can come up with...:thumbs:
 
You lot are definitely inspiring me to crack on! I'm really looking forward to the shoot with film, just like i say though, im paranoid in the fact im not sure my abilities match up to the lack of freedom when I only have 36 frames instead of 500+...

Bry
 
It's also about pleasure, what it is that makes you bother taking a shot. If it's cash, your daily bread, go digital. If it isn't, the playing field is pretty level on the media used. I write for a chunk of my living, after ten years of tapping at a laptop I went back to a fountain pen. The words come out at the pace I think, in a fine point medium. I have to re-type it to send out but what the hell, there are worse ways of using time.

Same with photography, I've never had much of an interest in cameras per se, even the best of them is more of a hindrance than a help at obtaining the pictures you see in your head and the whole digital escalation thing seems like a distraction from taking pictures. To others the possibilities of digital may be the motivation they seek. Most professional images end up on a screen or newsprint, neither are going to stretch quality or aesthetics. The fine print still pushes my buttons and fifteen years on from mass digitalisation, film still makes sense for that.
 
Arkady said:
Use an F against an F3 to know what frustration is when trying to change film in a hurry...
Click to expand...

Oh yes! he speaks the truth. I love using my F but am near to tears when needing to change film...

Bry, keep on going. Yesterday sounded horrible, today is film day all the way!

Best of luck

Alistair
 
jemdna said:
... I'm not sure my abilities match up to the lack of freedom when I only have 36 frames instead of 500+...
Click to expand...

It's how we all started... that's where the 'discipline' part comes in...

Jay Maisel once wrote, regarding subject matter: "...if it's worth taking one frame then it's worth taking three or four to get it right.
If it's not worth three or four, then it's not worth one..."

I think that sums up what film is about - you edit the shots in your head long before you press the shutter-button.
 
Kev M said:
You probably know this Bryan but I thought I'd point it out just in case that Delta3200 is more like ISO1000 but can be pushed to 3200 when required (or so I've read).
Click to expand...

Just thinking, so IF my camera decides not to take notice of the 3200 rating, I can manually set it to that and get the same effect? What im after is usable images probably taken in a fairly poor light situation whilst getting fairly heavy graining, (grungy effect)

Bry
 
Bry,

My own experience is to Google the film (all details) and check out some of the ways it has been used by others ie turned down / turned up etc

Flicker is a good site as you get to see the pictures of the various ASA settings used.
 
alistair.o said:
Bry,

My own experience is to Google the film (all details) and check out some of the ways it has been used by others ie turned down / turned up etc

Flicker is a good site as you get to see the pictures of the various ASA settings used.
Click to expand...

Cheers for the advice, I'll take a look across Flickr now :)

johnb said:
Crap days come & then go. Unemployment is currently biting hard into my family fortunes.

Good look with film & enjoy
Click to expand...

Cheers everyone for the positive replies, I guess for me its just getting used to a new lifestyle. I've never been rich by any means but usually been comfortable with money but the last 6 months I've barely got the bills out on time and now this latest blow just ****es me off :( I worked real hard to ever afford the camera and equipment and I've had to let it go for 1/4 its worth just to make another 2 weeks at home. THAT SAID...

I should just be thankful I have my family and my health, not everyone even gets those privileges :) Thanks TP :)

Bry
 
Arkady said:
Jay Maisel once wrote, regarding subject matter: "...if it's worth taking one frame then it's worth taking three or four to get it right.
If it's not worth three or four, then it's not worth one..."
Click to expand...


Thats a great thought. Never looked at it that way, though instinctively I do sometimes take more than 1 exposure when I think it could be a good shot, just to be sure I didn't get it wrong...
 
Arkady said:
I think that sums up what film is about - you edit the shots in your head long before you press the shutter-button.
Click to expand...

There's probably the key ingredient I'm missing, pre-visualisation. I've only had it once and that was "inspired/ripped-off" from something I saw on the telly. Funny thing is it's probably the only photo I've ever really loved.

I think it's what makes the darkroom or post-processing so difficult for me. Because I don't know exactly how I want it to look I spend so much time faffing about I get sick of it and abandon it.

jemdna said:
Just thinking, so IF my camera decides not to take notice of the 3200 rating, I can manually set it to that and get the same effect? What im after is usable images probably taken in a fairly poor light situation whilst getting fairly heavy graining, (grungy effect)

Bry
Click to expand...

I'll leave that with someone who has more experience of the film than I. Any chance you can run a test roll before the shoot or is it not practical? I'm sure someone here would develop it for you to save you the money. I'd do it but I've no idea how to extract or load 35mm.
 
***it's that nut behind the camera that makes or breaks the picture. So when it's a talentless nerk like me in charge of the shutter,***

Don't give up.........Even A Blind Squirrel Finds A Nut Once In A While :-)
 
Kev M said:
There's probably the key ingredient I'm missing, pre-visualisation. I've only had it once and that was "inspired/ripped-off" from something I saw on the telly. Funny thing is it's probably the only photo I've ever really loved.

I think it's what makes the darkroom or post-processing so difficult for me. Because I don't know exactly how I want it to look I spend so much time faffing about I get sick of it and abandon it.



I'll leave that with someone who has more experience of the film than I. Any chance you can run a test roll before the shoot or is it not practical? I'm sure someone here would develop it for you to save you the money. I'd do it but I've no idea how to extract or load 35mm.
Click to expand...

Cheers for your help bud, major appreciation! :)
 
jemdna said:
Just thinking, so IF my camera decides not to take notice of the 3200 rating, I can manually set it to that and get the same effect? What im after is usable images probably taken in a fairly poor light situation whilst getting fairly heavy graining, (grungy effect)

Bry
Click to expand...

I just had a quick squint at the manual for the Yashica AF230 and it has ability to over-ride the DX code ISO. So - if it comes up at 800, and you set the ISO manually to 3200, you'll need to tell the lab that the film has been "pushed 2 stops, to 3200ISO from it's DX coded 800ISO" - make sure you write it on in full, as if you just tick the +2 stops box, some labs may process it as +2 from 3200 - and ruin it!... Yes, I'm paranoid, and Yes, I've had it happen to me...
 
TBY, fantastic info, Im thinking of using a pro lab (Instead of Jessops :lol:) to dev' the film and I've made a note of what you've said :)

Cheers :)

Bry
 
jemdna said:
TBY, fantastic info, Im thinking of using a pro lab (Instead of Jessops :lol:) to dev' the film and I've made a note of what you've said :)

Cheers :)

Bry
Click to expand...

You could do a lot worse than sending the film to Ilford for processing, if you're going down the send to a lab route... £6.99 for processing, £3.00 extra for scanning, extra £2.00 for push/pull... Not cheap, but at least you know they'll understand their own film :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top