visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
tedwhite said:
The same thing happens to me too. It's part of the editing process. It often takes the perspective of a different time to look back with a fresh eye. It seems to me that life, not just photography, is just like that in so many ways.
Ron
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
visiondr said:
I take a completely different approach to personal "art" images. THAT's the stuff I LOVE doing. I end up previewing just about everything on a roll (pretty much unavoidable with a film scanner) but I only scan the ones that interest me. Unfortunately a LOT interests me. I've no qualms about cropping so I see potential in just about every frame (well almost every frame).
cameramanic
Following the light
I have been into photography for 50 years and was taught by my Grandfather
I wonder what he would have made of this thread.
I am reverting more to film these days, mostly B&W and more Medium format,
I travel a lot and my Bessa R is always with me, and my first choice when it comes to which camera to take.In the last couple of weeks I have bought a Rollie 35 T, an Olympus XA , When I browse E Bay I only look at the film cameras for sale, so my DSLR is left in its bag more these days. For non travel stuff I am using my Hasselblad 500 C ,B & W film and then scanning to Digital,
Which gives me the feeling of real photography, with the convenience of digital,
(I cleaned my F4s yesterday) and will use it for the first time in three years this weekend.
I wonder what he would have made of this thread.
I am reverting more to film these days, mostly B&W and more Medium format,
I travel a lot and my Bessa R is always with me, and my first choice when it comes to which camera to take.In the last couple of weeks I have bought a Rollie 35 T, an Olympus XA , When I browse E Bay I only look at the film cameras for sale, so my DSLR is left in its bag more these days. For non travel stuff I am using my Hasselblad 500 C ,B & W film and then scanning to Digital,
Which gives me the feeling of real photography, with the convenience of digital,
(I cleaned my F4s yesterday) and will use it for the first time in three years this weekend.
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
Ray,
Your approach is a valid one. It obviously works for you. Your fine images speak for themselves.
Ron
Your approach is a valid one. It obviously works for you. Your fine images speak for themselves.
Ron
rcoder
Member
I've toyed with the idea of reverting to film, but then I think about the number of shutter activations I've put on my D70 kit (25K in the last year and counting) and do the math in my head for what that would have cost shooting film: even at $2/roll for film + processing (an low estimate, if anything), I'm looking at upwards of $1200, meaning my entire digital kit (D70 + 3 lenses + speedlight) has already paid for itself.
Plus, there's the simple fact that even a consumer-grade DSLR can render better low-light color than any 35mm film on the planet. If you're shooting B/W, or in decent light, then there's a strong argument to be made for the character and dynamic range of good film, but in dark ambient lighting, you really can't compare the tiny amount of noise produced by a good DSLR to any color negative film being shot at equivalent ISO.
So, for "location" work (weddings, sporting events, all-day gatherings with wildly varying light) I still pull the D70 down; when it's a quiet walk around the neighborhood, or some quick portraits of a friend in the park, one of the old manual workhorse cameras goes into my bag.
Plus, there's the simple fact that even a consumer-grade DSLR can render better low-light color than any 35mm film on the planet. If you're shooting B/W, or in decent light, then there's a strong argument to be made for the character and dynamic range of good film, but in dark ambient lighting, you really can't compare the tiny amount of noise produced by a good DSLR to any color negative film being shot at equivalent ISO.
So, for "location" work (weddings, sporting events, all-day gatherings with wildly varying light) I still pull the D70 down; when it's a quiet walk around the neighborhood, or some quick portraits of a friend in the park, one of the old manual workhorse cameras goes into my bag.
arbib
Well-known
Not Ditching, But
Not Ditching, But
I am only using my DSLR for Studio stuff. And I am shooting more and more with my film Bessa R2 I have nice kit now, 25/50/85/135. Plus I have neglected EOS 1 Film.
I am selling my older D60 with VertGrip to get a lighter weight XT. plus the new Digic II CPU and 8mp sensor. but I want the LOW High ISO noise I can get the with XT, as compared to the High ISO noise above ISO 400 on the D60. Although the 100/200 ISO are creamy smooth. (with Digital, IT IS The GLASS PLUS SENSOR/CPU that records the image)
I have considered dumping the DSLR altogether, But I like best for studio work. (so do the models - instant result -)
Not Ditching, But
I am only using my DSLR for Studio stuff. And I am shooting more and more with my film Bessa R2 I have nice kit now, 25/50/85/135. Plus I have neglected EOS 1 Film.
I am selling my older D60 with VertGrip to get a lighter weight XT. plus the new Digic II CPU and 8mp sensor. but I want the LOW High ISO noise I can get the with XT, as compared to the High ISO noise above ISO 400 on the D60. Although the 100/200 ISO are creamy smooth. (with Digital, IT IS The GLASS PLUS SENSOR/CPU that records the image)
I have considered dumping the DSLR altogether, But I like best for studio work. (so do the models - instant result -)
photogdave
Shops local
rcoder said:
No offense, but I got a little chuckle out of this. Fuji 800 colour neg film beats most DSLRs, especially the D70, at 800 ISO hands down. Here's an example:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=43897&ppuser=3291
At 1600 or 3200 ISO I will agree with you.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
photogdave said:No offense, but I got a little chuckle out of this. Fuji 800 colour neg film beats most DSLRs, especially the D70, at 800 ISO hands down. Here's an example:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=43897&ppuser=3291
At 1600 or 3200 ISO I will agree with you.
heh.. you beat me to it. Heres a link to shots taken using 400 ISO at night.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=6252
Attachments
![Tank_farm_05[1].jpg](/data/attachments/6/6365-0c314da4358f508c2667d177490f2fbf.jpg)
Last edited:
rcoder
Member
photogdave said:No offense, but I got a little chuckle out of this. Fuji 800 colour neg film beats most DSLRs, especially the D70, at 800 ISO hands down. Here's an example:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=43897&ppuser=3291
At 1600 or 3200 ISO I will agree with you.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree -- after a certain point, such discussions become totally subjective, and the last thing I want to do is start a film vs. digital flamewar. I do know that I get results out of my D70 as ISO 1600 that would be almost inconceivable to get from film, barring access to a drum scanner and a fair bit of time in Photoshop for noise reduction.
Now, if I had the cash, I'd jump on an APS-C (or larger) sensor-equipped digital rangefinder in a heartbeat -- having the same flexibility in terms of lighting levels (and white balance) as my D70 in a simpler, more compact, mechanical body would be amazing. Losing the mirror slap would only further improve the situation.
eric
[was]: emaquiling
I'll be at Grand Canyon in Mid April. Mather campground. When will you be there? I'll be bringing my 4x5 and medium format only. Probably on Oly Stylus or Koni S2 just for everything else.Nostalgie said:
eric said:
Too bad, I wouldve liked to be around a 4x5 at the Canyon. Im going to be there in about a week.
Bryan Lee
Expat Street Photographer
I love film, I will always use it and when it runs out I will use glass negatives in big old cameras with a lens cap and no shutter. That does not mean I cannot have it both ways. Just this year I bought my wife a digital point and shoot. Now Im looking for a fixed lense 28mm digital point and shoot to mess around with.
This subject can get as contriversial and personal as one wants to take it but I no longer see a divide. Film is film and digital is digital, basicly you capture a image then process it and then present it. Afterall there are only two ways I can think of to present a image in the end, either on some form of paper as a print or on a moniter or digital screen. Knowing this and getting my head around it has given some freedom. I dont care for the whole photoshopped up fantasy image thing but if you make a real image a little bit more real I have no issue with that. It was a wakeup call this summer when news staff got caught photoshopping up war pictures out of Lebanon. That single issue crosses a line bigtime with me, kinda like Forest Gump pictures with Nixon being presented as historical fact. Photography is real for me, I dont want to lose that.
As is my style, my song and dance routine, Im going in the oppisite direction away from most of the photographic consumer market. As of now Im opening a Darkroom for some commercial work as it seems every darkroom around me has shut down. Now nobody even sells black and white film anymore here so I figure what the helll, Ill just open up a shop with no competition and a real good coffee maker. In reality I plan to use film and scan to digital in all formats and Im getting set up with large format in film with a old fashoined portrait studio to use at my pleasure. In the next couple years I will go big digital with a scanning back for 4x5 too. I was very impressed with betterlights scanning backs for digital large format. Then when I saw the Sinar modular system I saw the light you could say or at least I saw my future in photography.
I recently took a long and hard look at the D$LR scene and I will be passing on that for sometime and will refocus an film SLR cameras. I just saw that Tony sold a F5 for five or six hundred bucks and I would much rather have that than any consumer model D$LR. Just look at how Leica is screwing the people who bought that high dollar R9 digital back, now its totaly canceled. For that matter the Leica R series analog cameras are becoming very affordable. Just last year I passed on buying a Safari set with 3 or 4 lenses for half of what the body would have sold for new and it was imaculate in condition. Currently there are enough rangfinder and SLR cameras and lenses to last everbody on this forum 5 lifetimes and fewer people are catching the fever we have for mechanical cameras. This says that even more will become availavble. Museums can only handle so many Leica and other camera collections and at some point they will also be back on the street (The ones horded up by the collectors who are dieing off).
Software is whats going change most die hard film guys minds about digital anyway. Were currently just on the tip of the ice burg as far as it goes. This current overrated digital plastic passing as image capturing fine instruments have a shelf life of maybe six months. Im happy to say my first Bessa R2 is still kicking after getting dragged down every dirt road from Sihanoukville Cambodia all the way up the Mekong River to Luang Prabang Laos with a few side trips to Malaysia. A D$LR would have lasted maybe a week in the conditions I live in here which is at times 95% humidity and 35 plus centigrade. I learned my lesson at the camera shop when a fancy high dollar digital camera got sent back 3 times in a row, Im just glad it was not mine.
This subject can get as contriversial and personal as one wants to take it but I no longer see a divide. Film is film and digital is digital, basicly you capture a image then process it and then present it. Afterall there are only two ways I can think of to present a image in the end, either on some form of paper as a print or on a moniter or digital screen. Knowing this and getting my head around it has given some freedom. I dont care for the whole photoshopped up fantasy image thing but if you make a real image a little bit more real I have no issue with that. It was a wakeup call this summer when news staff got caught photoshopping up war pictures out of Lebanon. That single issue crosses a line bigtime with me, kinda like Forest Gump pictures with Nixon being presented as historical fact. Photography is real for me, I dont want to lose that.
As is my style, my song and dance routine, Im going in the oppisite direction away from most of the photographic consumer market. As of now Im opening a Darkroom for some commercial work as it seems every darkroom around me has shut down. Now nobody even sells black and white film anymore here so I figure what the helll, Ill just open up a shop with no competition and a real good coffee maker. In reality I plan to use film and scan to digital in all formats and Im getting set up with large format in film with a old fashoined portrait studio to use at my pleasure. In the next couple years I will go big digital with a scanning back for 4x5 too. I was very impressed with betterlights scanning backs for digital large format. Then when I saw the Sinar modular system I saw the light you could say or at least I saw my future in photography.
I recently took a long and hard look at the D$LR scene and I will be passing on that for sometime and will refocus an film SLR cameras. I just saw that Tony sold a F5 for five or six hundred bucks and I would much rather have that than any consumer model D$LR. Just look at how Leica is screwing the people who bought that high dollar R9 digital back, now its totaly canceled. For that matter the Leica R series analog cameras are becoming very affordable. Just last year I passed on buying a Safari set with 3 or 4 lenses for half of what the body would have sold for new and it was imaculate in condition. Currently there are enough rangfinder and SLR cameras and lenses to last everbody on this forum 5 lifetimes and fewer people are catching the fever we have for mechanical cameras. This says that even more will become availavble. Museums can only handle so many Leica and other camera collections and at some point they will also be back on the street (The ones horded up by the collectors who are dieing off).
Software is whats going change most die hard film guys minds about digital anyway. Were currently just on the tip of the ice burg as far as it goes. This current overrated digital plastic passing as image capturing fine instruments have a shelf life of maybe six months. Im happy to say my first Bessa R2 is still kicking after getting dragged down every dirt road from Sihanoukville Cambodia all the way up the Mekong River to Luang Prabang Laos with a few side trips to Malaysia. A D$LR would have lasted maybe a week in the conditions I live in here which is at times 95% humidity and 35 plus centigrade. I learned my lesson at the camera shop when a fancy high dollar digital camera got sent back 3 times in a row, Im just glad it was not mine.
S
Socke
Guest
I shoot film because this is the only way to shoot my Contax Gs, I shoot a lot of film because I like to use my Contax Gs, I think I get better pictures from my Contax Gs because I rely like to use them
I shot a a friends wedding with a Contax 167mt and a Contax G2 and a G1, burnt through three rolls BW400CN, five rolls Fuji Z200 and two rolls HP5 @EI1600. From the C41 films I've had 9x13cm prints and 10x15 from the HP5, all in all I had about 90% of my shots reasonably exposed and in focus. I showed those to the bride and groom to ask which they want bigger, what we should crop or work on.
Both wanted all of the pictures and found them great although I still think they are mediocre at best.
I learned two things from my first and last wedding, getting a couple brazilian girls to pose when they want to party is impossible and what I think about my pictures is not important.
Ok, a third one, but I knew it before, sitting at a table with some friends and drinks going through prints is more fun than looking on a laptop screen.
On the other hand, I like my D60 with a Sigma 17-35 EX for party pictures, very conveniant and fast and good enough for A4 prints.
I shot a a friends wedding with a Contax 167mt and a Contax G2 and a G1, burnt through three rolls BW400CN, five rolls Fuji Z200 and two rolls HP5 @EI1600. From the C41 films I've had 9x13cm prints and 10x15 from the HP5, all in all I had about 90% of my shots reasonably exposed and in focus. I showed those to the bride and groom to ask which they want bigger, what we should crop or work on.
Both wanted all of the pictures and found them great although I still think they are mediocre at best.
I learned two things from my first and last wedding, getting a couple brazilian girls to pose when they want to party is impossible and what I think about my pictures is not important.
Ok, a third one, but I knew it before, sitting at a table with some friends and drinks going through prints is more fun than looking on a laptop screen.
On the other hand, I like my D60 with a Sigma 17-35 EX for party pictures, very conveniant and fast and good enough for A4 prints.
K
Kin Lau
Guest
photogdave said:
Of course.. it's a Nikon
I've never tried Fuji Press 800, but it's suppose to be fairly similar to Superia 800, which I shot a fair bit of. Even my old 300D could beat that.
Rico
Well-known
One good thing about digital: I don't feel the need to dust my negs or spot my prints. All those imperfections are now proof of analog authenticity! Same for lenses with flare and other optical deficiencies. Digital is perfection with no personality.
Of course, I have a DSLR for those clinical moments.
Of course, I have a DSLR for those clinical moments.
amateriat
We're all light!
Bryan: you put it better than I could.
I would simply add that, to embrace the beauty of film, one needn't deny oneself the advantages of digital. In my case, a small, old-ish digital p/s, which was given to me, has come in incredibly handy for a number of practical things. And, yes, every time I pick up a dSLR, they really do, IMO, represent the ragged leading edge of digital imaging technology, with miles to go before things get truly interesting. Frankly, I'd be depressed as hell if things didn't progress a good deal farther than where we're at now. (A "mere" Olympus C8080 "prosumer" digicam was a hell of a lot more enjoyable for me to use than a Canon 1D Mk II)
- Barrett
I would simply add that, to embrace the beauty of film, one needn't deny oneself the advantages of digital. In my case, a small, old-ish digital p/s, which was given to me, has come in incredibly handy for a number of practical things. And, yes, every time I pick up a dSLR, they really do, IMO, represent the ragged leading edge of digital imaging technology, with miles to go before things get truly interesting. Frankly, I'd be depressed as hell if things didn't progress a good deal farther than where we're at now. (A "mere" Olympus C8080 "prosumer" digicam was a hell of a lot more enjoyable for me to use than a Canon 1D Mk II)
- Barrett
MadMan2k
Well-known
I contemplated it (during many a math class), and sold my DSLR kit for the M3 and the 35 skopar.
The DSLR was my sixth digital camera, and I started out in photography with digital. Then I got a film SLR and all the disadvantages of digital started annoying me. Film is still more or less available and affordable, which will probably change, so I might as well shoot it as much as I can. There'll be plenty of time to shoot digital once the film industry's products all get discontinued and used prices get ridiculous.
The DSLR was my sixth digital camera, and I started out in photography with digital. Then I got a film SLR and all the disadvantages of digital started annoying me. Film is still more or less available and affordable, which will probably change, so I might as well shoot it as much as I can. There'll be plenty of time to shoot digital once the film industry's products all get discontinued and used prices get ridiculous.
T
tedwhite
Guest
I am fortunate to have 3-4 100 foot rolls of b/w film in my freezer.
And will buy more.
And will buy more.
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Rico said:One good thing about digital: COLOR="DarkOrange"] I don't feel the need to dust my negs or spot my prints. [All those imperfections are now proof of analog authenticity![/COLOR] Same for lenses with flare and other optical deficiencies. Digital is perfection with no personality.
Of course, I have a DSLR for those clinical moments.
There's probably a PS filter for that.
I thought the photographer brought that to the equation.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Film is great - but the night results of digital are not bad either:
Digilux2:
Leica M8 @ Iso 1250 (= in reality ISO 1600)
Digilux2:
Leica M8 @ Iso 1250 (= in reality ISO 1600)