If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Going back to film...
After shooting mostly digital for years (and getting burnt out on my
photography) I am shifting gears and going back to shooting 120 film. While obviously shooting digital is easier and cheaper, I'm just not getting the results from my landscape photography like I used to. What made me realize I want to start shooting film again was when I got some proofs back from an old Ikoflex TLR I was given and had repaired. They had a smooth tonal, 3D look I haven't seen in years! It wasn't even a top shelf model (had the 3 element novar lens) but when I saw the 5X5 proofs, I remember why I loved shooting medium format film. I'm sure not gonna argue about why these images convinced me to clean up my darkroom and go back to analog photography (including not scan and print but optically printing again too) but there is something magical about the look of an image from this medium to me. To be fair, I was never happy with the results from 35mm film either.. I also found it interesting the local camera store told me film sales has picked up and some of the working pro's have gone back to film for some of their projects. I'm sure this is the point where some of the die hard digital guys will explain that "You just don't what your doing as digital is far superiour".. To those people, I could care less if you or some web site has all sorts of data to "prove it".. I know what I see and am going back to shooting 120 film :-) Stephanie |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Going back to film...
wrote in message ... After shooting mostly digital for years (and getting burnt out on my photography) I am shifting gears and going back to shooting 120 film. While obviously shooting digital is easier and cheaper, I'm just not getting the results from my landscape photography like I used to. What made me realize I want to start shooting film again was when I got some proofs back from an old Ikoflex TLR I was given and had repaired. They had a smooth tonal, 3D look I haven't seen in years! It wasn't even a top shelf model (had the 3 element novar lens) but when I saw the 5X5 proofs, I remember why I loved shooting medium format film. I'm sure not gonna argue about why these images convinced me to clean up my darkroom and go back to analog photography (including not scan and print but optically printing again too) but there is something magical about the look of an image from this medium to me. To be fair, I was never happy with the results from 35mm film either.. I also found it interesting the local camera store told me film sales has picked up and some of the working pro's have gone back to film for some of their projects. I'm sure this is the point where some of the die hard digital guys will explain that "You just don't what your doing as digital is far superiour".. To those people, I could care less if you or some web site has all sorts of data to "prove it".. I know what I see and am going back to shooting 120 film :-) Stephanie Welcome to the club Stephanie. While I certainly recognize that digital, or perhaps electronic is a better name, photography has a number of advantages, especially for commercial photographers, I still like working with film and printing on paper. There is still a fair variety of materials available. Ilford, in particular, seems to have undertaken to make sure there is an adequate supply of traditional photographic materials and chemistry of good quality. I still like Kodak products a lot but they seem bound and determined to destroy what little market they have left. This group, the medium format group, and the darkroom group seem to still have a bit of life in them. The Ikoflex was a very respectible camera, well made and with good lenses. I shoot mostly Rolleiflex's in this format but my favorite is a Rollicord IV. -- -- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Going back to film...
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Going back to film...
wrote in message ... After shooting mostly digital for years (and getting burnt out on my photography) I am shifting gears and going back to shooting 120 film. While obviously shooting digital is easier and cheaper, I'm just not getting the results from my landscape photography like I used to. What made me realize I want to start shooting film again was when I got some proofs back from an old Ikoflex TLR I was given and had repaired. They had a smooth tonal, 3D look I haven't seen in years! It wasn't even a top shelf model (had the 3 element novar lens) but when I saw the 5X5 proofs, I remember why I loved shooting medium format film. I'm sure not gonna argue about why these images convinced me to clean up my darkroom and go back to analog photography (including not scan and print but optically printing again too) but there is something magical about the look of an image from this medium to me. To be fair, I was never happy with the results from 35mm film either.. I also found it interesting the local camera store told me film sales has picked up and some of the working pro's have gone back to film for some of their projects. I'm sure this is the point where some of the die hard digital guys will explain that "You just don't what your doing as digital is far superiour".. To those people, I could care less if you or some web site has all sorts of data to "prove it".. I know what I see and am going back to shooting 120 film :-) . Stephanie - Don't forget that stalwart of the silver based medium, Freestyle Sales. http://www.freestylephoto.biz/ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Going back to film...
Alan Browne wrote:
A major attraction of digital is that you can shoot a lot more, with no cost, loss or penalty and of course convenience. This is one of the reasons for me to stop shooting digital. On the analog issue, when you shoot film and optically print it in the darkroom, that's pretty much an analog process don't ya think? There isn't much analog about a digital camera other than the light hitting the sensor. After that point, it's all digital. The image is converted to digital data before it ever leaves the sensor. Stephanie |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Going back to film...
Noons wrote:
wrote,on my timestamp of 27/02/2010 3:15 PM: I also found it interesting the local camera store told me film sales has picked up and some of the working pro's have gone back to film for some of their projects. I'm sure this is the point where some of the die hard digital guys will explain that "You just don't what your doing as digital is far superiour".. To those people, I could care less if you or some web site has all sorts of data to "prove it".. I know what I see and am going back to shooting 120 film :-) Stephanie, they don't really say that. All they say is they "haven't shot film in years". Which is true and defines their knowledge of the subject to a "T". Welcome back to film! It's a great way to make images. Thanks and while I think I remember how to use film, it's nice to see others are still enjoy shooting with it :-) Stephanie |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Going back to film...
wrote in message ... After shooting mostly digital for years (and getting burnt out on my photography) I am shifting gears and going back to shooting 120 film. While obviously shooting digital is easier and cheaper, I'm just not getting the results from my landscape photography like I used to. What made me realize I want to start shooting film again was when I got some proofs back from an old Ikoflex TLR I was given and had repaired. They had a smooth tonal, 3D look I haven't seen in years! I would argue that digital is not easier and cheaper, especially if you consider your time to have value, and if you look at how quickly the digital gear becomes out-dated. Every time I put a "new & improved" roll of film in my camera, I'm upgrading the image sensor. I just completed a modeling session with another photographer- actually I was the gaffer on set, but I was shooting also. In the four hour shoot, he ran through 4 memory cards; I shot two rolls of 24 exposure 35mm film. I'm about to go into the darkroom to develope the negs (45min); he is going to spend the next several hours eliminating the grossly bad shots (flash misfires, model not ready, etc), then eliminating the shots that are similar. Tomorrow, I'll spend about six hours printing the negs, he'll spend twice that amount of time photo-shopping the images- removing stray hairs, cloning out the light stand legs, etc. I made sure the model looked good and there was nothing intruding on the set before I shot. In the end, we will both have about the same number of 'keepers'. It wasn't even a top shelf model (had the 3 element novar lens) but when I saw the 5X5 proofs, I remember why I loved shooting medium format film. I'm sure not gonna argue about why these images convinced me to clean up my darkroom and go back to analog photography (including not scan and print but optically printing again too) but there is something magical about the look of an image from this medium to me. To be fair, I was never happy with the results from 35mm film either.. I shoot 35mm, 6x6, 6x7, and 4x5". There is an obvious difference in optical prints from each, but I think that below 16x20", it's difficult for most people to tell the difference in film format for properly exposed negs. A tripod can make a world of difference, especially in landscape work. Many labs these days are scanning negs for printing. If your 5x5 proofs were printed on a scan-to-print system (generally a minilab less than 10 years old), make some optical prints and compare them- you may be in for another pleasant suprize. I also found it interesting the local camera store told me film sales has picked up and some of the working pro's have gone back to film for some of their projects. I'm sure this is the point where some of the die hard digital guys will explain that "You just don't what your doing as digital is far superiour".. To those people, I could care less if you or some web site has all sorts of data to "prove it".. I know what I see and am going back to shooting 120 film :-) Stephanie |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Going back to film...
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Going back to film...
wrote,on my timestamp of 28/02/2010 6:11 AM:
Stephanie, they don't really say that. All they say is they "haven't shot film in years". Which is true and defines their knowledge of the subject to a "T". Welcome back to film! It's a great way to make images. Thanks and while I think I remember how to use film, it's nice to see others are still enjoy shooting with it :-) you bet: http://wizofoz2k.deviantart.com/gallery/#_browse |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HELP PLEASE - APS REWIND BACK TO ZERO WITH NEW FILM | Fred McKenzie | APS Photographic Equipment | 3 | September 4th 04 09:56 PM |
6X8 ROLL FILM BACK FOR 4X5 | Massimiliano Spoto | Fine Art, Framing and Display | 0 | May 20th 04 05:55 AM |