BBC: The photographers who refuse to abandon traditional film cameras

CameraQuest

CameraQuest

Head Bartender
Staff member
Local time
11:33 PM
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
6,605
"Film photography was supposed to have been killed off by the digital era - but a committed band of enthusiasts refuse to abandon the traditional camera. Stephen Dowling finds out why for some, film never went out of fashion. "

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32337778

"Edgar England, a manager at London's West End Cameras, which specialises in film and film developing, says that a decade ago a pallet of hundreds of rolls of film might take six weeks to sell out. Now it only takes a few days."
 
Thanks for the article, I would otherwise have missed it; thoroughly enjoyed it.

Mostly I buy my film from West End Cameras. Great people to deal with, having a good range of films and they're always ready to advise.
 
Nice to read, nothing so new for is probably. I shoot both film and digital, sometimes more film, sometimes more digital, depending on mood, needs and circumstances. simply like that:
robert
 
Several years ago before digital took root, an old school photographer had a shop that I used to frequent said in no uncertain terms, 'Digital cameras will make photographers out of idiots and idiots out of photographers'.

I thought that was kind of harsh. Until I observed a wedding photographer spend more time looking at the screen to review/scroll through the images he took instead of taking photos.

It appeared to me he wasn't confident enough with his work that he had to check each photo to see if it was good. What I also noticed was while he was looking down there were several missed 'Kodak Moments'. One member of the wedding party who seemed particularly annoyed approached him to comment that he spent more time looking down instead of taking photos.

In the video Long Live Film, a photographer enjoys film since he exercises basic photography during each shoot. He is confident in his abilities. He further states that he is not paid for fixing mistakes with software.
 
Wexford said:
Several years ago before digital took root, an old school photographer had a shop that I used to frequent said in no uncertain terms, 'Digital cameras will make photographers out of idiots and idiots out of photographers'.

I thought that was kind of harsh. Until I observed a wedding photographer spend more time looking at the screen to review/scroll through the images he took instead of taking photos.

It appeared to me he wasn't confident enough with his work that he had to check each photo to see if it was good. What I also noticed was while he was looking down there were several missed 'Kodak Moments'. One member of the wedding party who seemed particularly annoyed approached him to comment that he spent more time looking down instead of taking photos.

In the video Long Live Film, a photographer enjoys film since he exercises basic photography during each shoot. He is confident in his abilities. He further states that he is not paid for fixing mistakes with software.
Click to expand...

My wedding (which occurred about 2.5 years ago) was with a Contax 645 and 80mm F2. The photographer switched to a 5D Mkii for evening shots, which I could understand (higher iso).

I was impressed that a number of wedding photogs are using film. I think a lot of folks like the MF look.
 
Well known article :)
My favorite part is this camera store guy who has film selling ten times faster than ten years ago.
My argument was what ten years ago film was sold and developed at every corner.
Now it is just this camera store. But I was lectured what London UK is still all about the film.

I leave in very different reality at the far end of the Dominion with bunch of bulk loaders stuffed with fresh bw and expired cine film, to be processed in our home basement.
 
One of the things I have noticed for a number of years now is the number of law suites being filed against photographers for poor quality images..and all of them were using digital.

Just here in the DFW area there are hundreds of so called "professional" photographers with their consumer grade digital cameras machine gunning their way through weddings and family events then returning "snaps" to the customer instead of memories... On the other hand there is a small group of photographers still using film and have to turn away clients since they are booked up months in advance..
 
"I thought that was kind of harsh. Until I observed a wedding photographer spend more time looking at the screen to review/scroll through the images he took instead of taking photos."

Back in the day we over shot everything to be sure we got great results. It was the only way with film. Pro's don't make excuses, they produce results. Now, by chimping, the pro can determine if he has the shot or not.

In the studio, with a 'Blad, we shot tons of Polaroids, to check exposure and be sure we had the shot. It's what Pro's did.

I'm not sure where one is better over the other.
 
Based on my family weddings photography the amount of clueless idiots with the film camera was the same or even more.
Registration photos taken by the "pro" are terrible. Event horizon is tilted. I think dude was wasted.
And unofficial after registration photos were taken by me. Camera in one hand, flash in another... with no cord in between. The party was three days long. I came with one dull, OOF photo.
Same camera in my sig and avatar, BTW :)
 
colyn said:
One of the things I have noticed for a number of years now is the number of lawsuits being filed against photographers for poor quality images..and all of them were using digital.
Click to expand...

A college friend who has a digital camera, not the prosumer model, indicated she would begin shooting wedding photos. I asked her when she planned on going to the church and reception hall to take a few sample photos, check out lighting with a few meter readings and find out what and where she's allowed to photograph inside the church.

She looked surprised and said she would just show up the day of the wedding and take photos.

I've been asked once in my life to shoot a wedding. I'm not a professional nor have I ever claimed to be. I told my friend he'd better spend the money on a professional photog.

He said he couldn't afford a pro. He said some photos would be better than no photos. I still declined his offer. I'd rather he be angry with me for turning him down than to be angry at me for shooting a box of 'some photos'.

I told him that shooting a wedding is a very serious business. A man only gets married three or four times in his life. He'd better hire the best! :D
 
jsrockit said:
I meant the digital-phobic comments... as if anyone who prefers digital is a fool and film users are smart / heroic. It's all photography.
Click to expand...


Yes it seems to be the subject of endless fascination for some people.
I`ve found myself to be equally foolish with both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom