Another RF star goes to digital...

[fotografz]

I think each person has to asses their final product and what it is they are trying to accomplish.

Jeff Ascough does a ton of weddings each year, and I suspect that he farms the processing because of the volume. When the film labs failed him, he moved to digital. But Jeff points out that he used C-41 B&W films, not traditional B&W emulsions.

I also shoot weddings, and frequently have used a M camera ... and still do. I do not have a problem with my lab who still does a large volume of C-41 processing. Should the time come that they don't I will continue with using traditional B&W films ... because there is still nothing in the digital realm that looks like it. (BTW, we are a long time digital shooter and currently use a Canon 1DsMKII and various MF digital backs).

 

[zeos 386sx]

When the film labs failed him, he moved to digital. But Jeff points out that he used C-41 B&W films, not traditional B&W emulsions.

A local photo store/lab just closed. They were doing C-41 and had already farmed out the traditional b&w because there just wasn't enough of it coming in to justify doing it in-house. Their stated reason for closing was the general move to digital. There just wasn't enough film business - period.

I think I noticed in an earlier post that Ascough is sending his files to Austrailia for printing. I believe we will increasingly see fewer and fewer labs doing high-quality processing - including printing - just because of the volume and costs involved.

We seem to be headed toward an inkjet world.

 

[GeneW]

Here are Jeff's own words concerning his technique changes since converting to digital. Specifically, he was asked about staying out of the customers "awareness" circle and being unobtrusive:

"Staying unobtrusive. This hasn't been as much of an issue as I thought it would be. I've come to the conclusion that unobtrusiveness is more a state of mind rather than a choice of equipment. My shooting style in general hasn't changed, but I have had to adjust mentally to the fact that I've probably only got one chance to get the shot with a DSLR. With Leica you could shoot and the subject wouldn't be aware of the camera..."

This is thought provoking, and it rings true, especially when you think of folks who use TLR's and even Hassy's for street shooting.

Gene

 

[fotografz]

Well, the good thing about traditional emulsion B&W is that it's easy to do yourself, and supplies are readily available. There simply isn't anything digital that looks the same a tri-x. The digital drive to produce smooth, grain free images seems amateurish and homogeneous to me. An obsession with sharpness and flawlessness at the expense of raw emotional power and impact. Pretty soon everything will look the same ... all sterile and uniform.

 

[pmu]

Well, the good thing about traditional emulsion B&W is that it's easy to do yourself, and supplies are readily available. There simply isn't anything digital that looks the same a tri-x. The digital drive to produce smooth, grain free images seems amateurish and homogeneous to me. An obsession with sharpness and flawlessness at the expense of raw emotional power and impact. Pretty soon everything will look the same ... all sterile and uniform.

That text could be from my mouth! And my natural instinct was to do just the opposite in my own shooting... (if interested check these: http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member?user_id=1275877 and photos: http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?include=all&user_id=1275877 )