MiniMoke
Well-known
Can you pursue digital photography like film photography?
I don't mean by this if you can reproduce the look of film in digital media. There are software solutions out there that give a fair approximation of the 'film look'. What I mean is, can you approach the process of taking photographs with a digital camera the way you do it with an analog one?
What defines the analog way? I think it's the deliberate approach you take with it. I want to make each frame as good as I can. This stems from the olden times as a student when money was tight and film expensive. Well, money still IS tight and film even more expensive to use today. But it's not only this aspect, it's the whole process of using a film camera that forces you to slow down, to THINK about your picture, to visualize it, to plan it and finally to press the shutter and HOPE it turns out about the way you intended it to.
I simply get a kick out of using an analog, manual camera and what’s more, a Rangefinder or scale focus camera that just restricts me to do all this before clicking away.
Of course, when I use my X100 I try to behave! I try not to chimp, but the urge is there. I turned off picture review, turned off the back screen, never using it to compose, really trying to do it like I do it with the CL. The fact that the X100 has a prime, fixed lens in fact made me buy it and I NEVER regretted this. The 35 is really all I need as I found out.
I even try to wait a day or two before loading the pictures up to my computer to review them, all in order to make it feel like analog. But it’s still a digital camera, and just KNOWING I could just click away and make my choice among the pictures later, KNOWING I could take a peek at the pictures immediately is disturbing my peace of mind…..
Perhaps I’m a desperate case, longing for the Goode Olde Times (they were neither good or better than today!), or I’m a hopelessly outdated model (turning 50 this year)?
Digital photography, in my opinion, is all about convenience, and only that! Quick results; cheap, if you don’t count the fact that cameras become obsolete in a year or two and the urge to buy new ones is too strong (the X100s is calling!!); you have a myriad possibilities in just one camera with programs, settings like Auto-ISO, HDR……
Analog, on the other hand, is a hassle. No, really! It is! Load a roll of low ASA B&W film and you are stuck with it for at least the next days (I’m a slow shooter). Then the film is done, out with it and off to the lab (I’ll eventually start developing myself when and if film will be my final decision). The labs around here are slow, at least a week to get your pictures back as they all send the films off to foreign lands to develop…..
OK, after a week you get the negatives back. One look to confirm that hopefully most are adequately exposed (and I am bad at judging them), then they have to be scanned…. Oh man, the time spent, shall I say lost, puzzling about the scanner settings.
Then they are on the computer. Cool, now the digital and analog ways come together, as it’s useless to try to print on my Inkjet printer. Expensive disasters are the product! So I can send them online to a printing service (quite inexpensive and OK results), or, with the negatives, bring them to the lab and wait (again) for the prints.
Now what if I did it all the old way, with light table, and only real prints (by a lab, as I definitely don’t trust myself in a darkroom).
I just hope I’m not alone being torn between the two worlds of photography, or are they just one? It’s the picture that counts, no? Or is it the media? I don’t know and as I am the kind of guy who takes forever to reach a bad decision, I guess I’m stuck.
And by the way, going digital AND analog is not an option as I would then procrastinate for hours about which camera to take. One camera is my way, choices disturb me!
Thanks a lot for hearing me out.
I don't mean by this if you can reproduce the look of film in digital media. There are software solutions out there that give a fair approximation of the 'film look'. What I mean is, can you approach the process of taking photographs with a digital camera the way you do it with an analog one?
What defines the analog way? I think it's the deliberate approach you take with it. I want to make each frame as good as I can. This stems from the olden times as a student when money was tight and film expensive. Well, money still IS tight and film even more expensive to use today. But it's not only this aspect, it's the whole process of using a film camera that forces you to slow down, to THINK about your picture, to visualize it, to plan it and finally to press the shutter and HOPE it turns out about the way you intended it to.
I simply get a kick out of using an analog, manual camera and what’s more, a Rangefinder or scale focus camera that just restricts me to do all this before clicking away.
Of course, when I use my X100 I try to behave! I try not to chimp, but the urge is there. I turned off picture review, turned off the back screen, never using it to compose, really trying to do it like I do it with the CL. The fact that the X100 has a prime, fixed lens in fact made me buy it and I NEVER regretted this. The 35 is really all I need as I found out.
I even try to wait a day or two before loading the pictures up to my computer to review them, all in order to make it feel like analog. But it’s still a digital camera, and just KNOWING I could just click away and make my choice among the pictures later, KNOWING I could take a peek at the pictures immediately is disturbing my peace of mind…..
Perhaps I’m a desperate case, longing for the Goode Olde Times (they were neither good or better than today!), or I’m a hopelessly outdated model (turning 50 this year)?
Digital photography, in my opinion, is all about convenience, and only that! Quick results; cheap, if you don’t count the fact that cameras become obsolete in a year or two and the urge to buy new ones is too strong (the X100s is calling!!); you have a myriad possibilities in just one camera with programs, settings like Auto-ISO, HDR……
Analog, on the other hand, is a hassle. No, really! It is! Load a roll of low ASA B&W film and you are stuck with it for at least the next days (I’m a slow shooter). Then the film is done, out with it and off to the lab (I’ll eventually start developing myself when and if film will be my final decision). The labs around here are slow, at least a week to get your pictures back as they all send the films off to foreign lands to develop…..
OK, after a week you get the negatives back. One look to confirm that hopefully most are adequately exposed (and I am bad at judging them), then they have to be scanned…. Oh man, the time spent, shall I say lost, puzzling about the scanner settings.
Then they are on the computer. Cool, now the digital and analog ways come together, as it’s useless to try to print on my Inkjet printer. Expensive disasters are the product! So I can send them online to a printing service (quite inexpensive and OK results), or, with the negatives, bring them to the lab and wait (again) for the prints.
Now what if I did it all the old way, with light table, and only real prints (by a lab, as I definitely don’t trust myself in a darkroom).
I just hope I’m not alone being torn between the two worlds of photography, or are they just one? It’s the picture that counts, no? Or is it the media? I don’t know and as I am the kind of guy who takes forever to reach a bad decision, I guess I’m stuck.
And by the way, going digital AND analog is not an option as I would then procrastinate for hours about which camera to take. One camera is my way, choices disturb me!
Thanks a lot for hearing me out.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Well, yes: you can. At least I can.
I often set up the M9 to a fixed ISO, manual exposure mode, LCD off, and just go shooting the way I do with the M4-2 or CL. I don't look at the LCD, I shoot the whole session or a set number of frames before I upload them to take a look.
It's not hard to do this. Just takes a little discipline. I'm so used to working that way I do it as a matter of course.
Um, I have about 15 cameras ready to take pictures with at a moment's notice. I choose which one to use ... if it's a film camera, I shoot with it until I use up the film I loaded. That can be between 8 and 55 frames, depending on the camera and film I load. If a digital, I shoot until I finish the shooting session I intended, usually in the 15-35 frames. Lots of choices, but then I've always liked the diversity of cameras for how they see differently.
G
I often set up the M9 to a fixed ISO, manual exposure mode, LCD off, and just go shooting the way I do with the M4-2 or CL. I don't look at the LCD, I shoot the whole session or a set number of frames before I upload them to take a look.
It's not hard to do this. Just takes a little discipline. I'm so used to working that way I do it as a matter of course.
Um, I have about 15 cameras ready to take pictures with at a moment's notice. I choose which one to use ... if it's a film camera, I shoot with it until I use up the film I loaded. That can be between 8 and 55 frames, depending on the camera and film I load. If a digital, I shoot until I finish the shooting session I intended, usually in the 15-35 frames. Lots of choices, but then I've always liked the diversity of cameras for how they see differently.
G
MiniMoke
Well-known
Good to see there are others doing digital the analog way. Thank you Godfrey!
True, the X100 (and even more the future X100s from what I hear) have all I really need to make pictures, but there's always the call of the wild.... no, analog that's nagging me.
As I explained, choices make me nervous and prevent me from doing what I intended to do, and what's more, money's tight once again and deciding on one way would free up some cash.
True, the X100 (and even more the future X100s from what I hear) have all I really need to make pictures, but there's always the call of the wild.... no, analog that's nagging me.
As I explained, choices make me nervous and prevent me from doing what I intended to do, and what's more, money's tight once again and deciding on one way would free up some cash.
petronius
Veteran
Digital cameras are not analog cameras. I wasted time and pictures trying to use a digital camera like an analog one. Since I stopped this, life is much easier. I compose on the screen and when I´m in the mood, I chimp. If I want the film feeling, I use film.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Indeed. Saying I can use a digital camera "like" I use an analog camera doesn't mean that the cameras are identical or work exactly the same way. Only that my attitudes and general operation when using the camera is the same if I choose to work that way.
The two types of cameras have different capabilities, characteristics, advantages, and warts derivative of the utterly different underlying technology used for recording light. Exploit the advantages, avoid the warts, and use the capabilities and characteristics to enhance the visual idea you are looking to express.
G
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Glad to help.
For you, follow your inclinations: minimize distraction and find peace by settling on one or another type of camera, adhere to your budget, and let the rest go.
(Sheesh, I feel like my high school counselor probably did ... ;-))
G
Chris101
summicronia
Bingo! ...
MiniMoke
Well-known
Had some time to do a bit of thinking (hurt !), and in fact I think what I'm really looking for is not the distinction between film and digital but I want a pure manual rangefinder camera, film or digital.
I got the CL - needs probably a quick CLA but it seems to work fine (test film will be back next week).
I'm going to wait for these results and I ordered some prints of my scanned negatives. I'll see if I can get a satisfactory quality out of my scanner.
Darkroom printing is out, no room and time....
If the film way does not prove up to my expectations, I'll stick with the X100 or perhaps..... let's dream a bit, a nice used M8? How about the sensor lifetime - is it reasonable to buy a M8?
No real other choice for digital rangefinders now that the Epson R-D1 is long gone and a bit obsolete.
Anyways, thanks all for your helpful input and Godfrey, thanks for playing the counselor ;-))
I got the CL - needs probably a quick CLA but it seems to work fine (test film will be back next week).
I'm going to wait for these results and I ordered some prints of my scanned negatives. I'll see if I can get a satisfactory quality out of my scanner.
Darkroom printing is out, no room and time....
If the film way does not prove up to my expectations, I'll stick with the X100 or perhaps..... let's dream a bit, a nice used M8? How about the sensor lifetime - is it reasonable to buy a M8?
No real other choice for digital rangefinders now that the Epson R-D1 is long gone and a bit obsolete.
Anyways, thanks all for your helpful input and Godfrey, thanks for playing the counselor ;-))
paradoxbox
Well-known
There's one thing that really helps me decide when I'm debating whether to take my digital R-D1 or one of my film cameras be it medium format or 35mm.
The most important - I check the weather and the time of day. Is it raining hard? If yes, then the R-D1 stays home. Is it extremely bright out with ultra contrast? If yes, I grab a film camera with low ISO negative film, because no digital sanely priced has the dynamic range that I can get with a $3 roll of film. I'm sure there are some digital cameras that cost as much as a car that do, but I'm not paying for that. Is it very cold? Out comes the film camera - digital camera batteries die REALLY quickly when it's cold outside.
I also decide how badly do I need to see the photos I'm going to take today? If there's an urgency to get the photos online or printed then without question I bring along my R-D1.
Lastly I decide about the style of image I'm going to capture and the purpose of the image - is it going to be a vacation snap, a street photo, an abstract shot, etc. I would probably grab my GRD for quick snaps or maybe street photos, but medium format for dreamy photos of shadows or flowers, etc.
The most important - I check the weather and the time of day. Is it raining hard? If yes, then the R-D1 stays home. Is it extremely bright out with ultra contrast? If yes, I grab a film camera with low ISO negative film, because no digital sanely priced has the dynamic range that I can get with a $3 roll of film. I'm sure there are some digital cameras that cost as much as a car that do, but I'm not paying for that. Is it very cold? Out comes the film camera - digital camera batteries die REALLY quickly when it's cold outside.
I also decide how badly do I need to see the photos I'm going to take today? If there's an urgency to get the photos online or printed then without question I bring along my R-D1.
Lastly I decide about the style of image I'm going to capture and the purpose of the image - is it going to be a vacation snap, a street photo, an abstract shot, etc. I would probably grab my GRD for quick snaps or maybe street photos, but medium format for dreamy photos of shadows or flowers, etc.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Don't make a decision on film vs digital with one test roll. It takes time to learn how to see through a particular capture medium, regardless of whether it is film or digital, and time to learn how to process and render what you capture with either into finished photographs.
The CL has been one of my favorite Leicas for thirty years. Enjoy it!
Keep it simple, stick to that and the X100 for when you prefer to shoot with a digital camera. It's all upside from there.
G
The CL has been one of my favorite Leicas for thirty years. Enjoy it!
Keep it simple, stick to that and the X100 for when you prefer to shoot with a digital camera. It's all upside from there.
G
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
If you like film, that's your final destination.
Starting film photography in this digital age without at least trying darkroom printing, is like climbing the tallest mountain and took the helicopter ride down just before you reached the top.
That is of course my own personal view
David Hughes
David Hughes
Why not see film as a manual camera and digital as an automatic? it might make life easier.
Reading the rants etc reminded me that the ISO setting can be changed on digital, something I've never done...
Regards, David
Reading the rants etc reminded me that the ISO setting can be changed on digital, something I've never done...
Regards, David
MiniMoke
Well-known
Update!
I did some test scans from b&w negatives from my Oly Trip and Canonet 28, and I finally found my optimal settings!!!!! My Epson V600 is really not bad and gives quite impressive scan results. Even a little better with ViewScan than with Epson scan.
Then I printed some of the scans on my HP Officejet 6500..... oh what a mess! I compared with an original lab print and the quality was horrible, grainy, fuzzy and dull.
Then I had an idea: Is the old Canon Pixma iP4200 still in the garage? I found it, dusted it off and checked the cartridges - still OK.
So I printed the pics on this venerable, 7 year old machine and they came out brilliantly!!! No grain (except for film grain visible with a loupe), shiny blacks and terrific contrast and fine graduation. Really very nearly equal to the lab print!!
Not that I'll print everything on the Canon - too expensive - I'll order prints online, but it's great to see that i'll be able to get a very good quality scan from my negatives.
One more good point for film photography (OK won't beat wet printing of course - we'll see about that later).
Now if I could only have my CL negatives......... And of course, I won't decide on one roll of film!
And keep up with your ideas and suggestions - this is what makes RFF so great!
I did some test scans from b&w negatives from my Oly Trip and Canonet 28, and I finally found my optimal settings!!!!! My Epson V600 is really not bad and gives quite impressive scan results. Even a little better with ViewScan than with Epson scan.
Then I printed some of the scans on my HP Officejet 6500..... oh what a mess! I compared with an original lab print and the quality was horrible, grainy, fuzzy and dull.
Then I had an idea: Is the old Canon Pixma iP4200 still in the garage? I found it, dusted it off and checked the cartridges - still OK.
So I printed the pics on this venerable, 7 year old machine and they came out brilliantly!!! No grain (except for film grain visible with a loupe), shiny blacks and terrific contrast and fine graduation. Really very nearly equal to the lab print!!
Not that I'll print everything on the Canon - too expensive - I'll order prints online, but it's great to see that i'll be able to get a very good quality scan from my negatives.
One more good point for film photography (OK won't beat wet printing of course - we'll see about that later).
Now if I could only have my CL negatives......... And of course, I won't decide on one roll of film!
And keep up with your ideas and suggestions - this is what makes RFF so great!
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Sounds like you're making progress.
I've used VueScan to drive my scanners since 2000. I still marvel at the quality I can get out of a medium format negative scan made with an ancient Epson 2450 flat bed scanner using VueScan.
I print all my own work, have been printing with an Epson R2400 since 2005. It's way past its due-by-date, having pumped out well over 7000 8x10 equivalents at this point, but it's still chugging along. When it fails, I'll replace it with the 3800 series printer.
I was a pretty good B&W darkroom printer in the day, printed in the darkroom from 1967 to 1992, but I never achieved the print quality I get from the Epson R2400.
Color ... I always left that to other people in the wet lab. Too much of a pain to get it right in chemistry. Piece of cake with image processing and digital printer. ;-)
G
I've used VueScan to drive my scanners since 2000. I still marvel at the quality I can get out of a medium format negative scan made with an ancient Epson 2450 flat bed scanner using VueScan.
I print all my own work, have been printing with an Epson R2400 since 2005. It's way past its due-by-date, having pumped out well over 7000 8x10 equivalents at this point, but it's still chugging along. When it fails, I'll replace it with the 3800 series printer.
I was a pretty good B&W darkroom printer in the day, printed in the darkroom from 1967 to 1992, but I never achieved the print quality I get from the Epson R2400.
Color ... I always left that to other people in the wet lab. Too much of a pain to get it right in chemistry. Piece of cake with image processing and digital printer. ;-)
G
mr.yates
that's Ellsworth.
Well, yes: you can. At least I can.
I often set up the M9 to a fixed ISO, manual exposure mode, LCD off, and just go shooting the way I do with the M4-2 or CL. I don't look at the LCD, I shoot the whole session or a set number of frames before I upload them to take a look.
It's not hard to do this. Just takes a little discipline. I'm so used to working that way I do it as a matter of course.
Bravo. This is my approach as well. The LCD is only there to find out how many frames are left or where the batteries are at 99.9% of the time for me.
MiniMoke
Well-known
OK, this is it!
I took a momentous decision today. I sold my X100 yesterday for quite a good price, but still did not know if my way would go down the Film Lane or the Digital Highway.
I did some thinking tonight, and some clever calculations this morning and at last I came to a decision: DIGITAL !
I have pre-ordered the X100s which will be out until the end of this month here in Luxembourg, and until then I'll enjoy my film gear a bit (perhaps I will keep a Trip or two.... here goes, the old film daemon whispering in my ear).
I feel better now, just hope my determination will keep up and I won't lapse into doubt again.
The final decision was a cost analysis - film is expensive, period! OK, the cameras keep their value nicely now that they are rock bottom, and digital gear depreciates FAST, but for the cost of film and developing I'll be able to buy a new camera the likes of an X100s every 3 years!
I was always happy with the quality of the pictures of my X100, and now that the manual focus problem seems nicely solved in the X100s I'll be happy with it.
Thanks for all the input from you great guys and gals.
And NO, don't try to make me feel guilty for ditching film pleeeeeeeease.
Some great film gear will be up for grabs here VERY soon: Leica CL - Elmar 90 F/4 - Jupiter 8 - Oly 35SP - and perhaps an Oly Trip 35 or two, who knows
I took a momentous decision today. I sold my X100 yesterday for quite a good price, but still did not know if my way would go down the Film Lane or the Digital Highway.
I did some thinking tonight, and some clever calculations this morning and at last I came to a decision: DIGITAL !
I have pre-ordered the X100s which will be out until the end of this month here in Luxembourg, and until then I'll enjoy my film gear a bit (perhaps I will keep a Trip or two.... here goes, the old film daemon whispering in my ear).
I feel better now, just hope my determination will keep up and I won't lapse into doubt again.
The final decision was a cost analysis - film is expensive, period! OK, the cameras keep their value nicely now that they are rock bottom, and digital gear depreciates FAST, but for the cost of film and developing I'll be able to buy a new camera the likes of an X100s every 3 years!
I was always happy with the quality of the pictures of my X100, and now that the manual focus problem seems nicely solved in the X100s I'll be happy with it.
Thanks for all the input from you great guys and gals.
And NO, don't try to make me feel guilty for ditching film pleeeeeeeease.
Some great film gear will be up for grabs here VERY soon: Leica CL - Elmar 90 F/4 - Jupiter 8 - Oly 35SP - and perhaps an Oly Trip 35 or two, who knows
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
It's never a one way street either way, that's the beauty of today's photography.
Enjoy your X100s.
Film will be there should you decided to pick it up again in the future. Don't worry
Enjoy your X100s.
Film will be there should you decided to pick it up again in the future. Don't worry
hepcat
Former PH, USN
Ok, somebody help me understand here, please... when did the world become all-or-none? Why in the world CAN'T you shoot a digital camera the way you shoot a film camera? I didn't even know that there was a different way to shoot a digital camera.
I have both digital and film bodies now after a ten year hiatus from film and shooting digital only... I bought a film body to burn through the large box of expired film I've had lying around for years and years. I use the film body when I want a specific look; particularly grainy b&w. Post processing is, of course, different for each genre... but the end result is similar now as I scan my film and still post-process it in LR4/CS-5.
I don't approach making images differently with either body though. Can somebody please tell me what I'm missing here?
I have both digital and film bodies now after a ten year hiatus from film and shooting digital only... I bought a film body to burn through the large box of expired film I've had lying around for years and years. I use the film body when I want a specific look; particularly grainy b&w. Post processing is, of course, different for each genre... but the end result is similar now as I scan my film and still post-process it in LR4/CS-5.
I don't approach making images differently with either body though. Can somebody please tell me what I'm missing here?
MiniMoke
Well-known
The problem for me lies in the act of deciding what camera to use on a given day, for a specific object. It's purely personnal and comes from my difficulty to take decisions. It's a mind thing, call me crazy but I'll waste the right moment because I'll be worrying about the camera to use!
So I decided to go digital, even if part of me longs to handle those beautiful film cartridges and try to fiddle the film into those stupid Leica CL winder tabs.
I still stick to my decision, though I dry-shoot the CL a lot those last days, waiting for my x100s.
I'm waiting for the last test film with the CL before putting it in the classifieds!
So I decided to go digital, even if part of me longs to handle those beautiful film cartridges and try to fiddle the film into those stupid Leica CL winder tabs.
I still stick to my decision, though I dry-shoot the CL a lot those last days, waiting for my x100s.
I'm waiting for the last test film with the CL before putting it in the classifieds!