Going Back To Film From M8

Fred Burton said:
"after working over 10 years 100% digital i have gotten a HUUUUUGGGGGEEE digital archive which is soon to be 4 TB, this is getting scarier and scarier to keep safe."

The question, though, besides any concerns about archival security, is would you have shot the equivalent of 4 TB in that same period of time if you had only had film at your disposal? Personally or professionally?
Click to expand...

No probably not, and that's is even better, i have no need for the biggest private image archive in the world, hehe...
 
dcsang said:
I believe my affair with the M8 is over.

Oh, sure, I had my fun.
I got turned on and excited by the ability of the camera to give me pleasure almost instantly.
I enjoyed the way it tempted me to "click" away frivolously and with wild abandon.
I even found myself partaking in the "self gratification" by chimping endlessly.

So why am i considering ending it with the M8?

Well, it sort of relates back to this old post:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14023

I came back to rangefinders for a reason and that reason wasn't for / didn't involve digital imagery. I enjoy the immediateness of digital but, the more I shot with the M8, the more I realized that it left me feeling, well, "empty" (for the lack of a better word). I wanted to wind the next frame into place and cock the shutter manually. I wanted to get back into developing film. I wanted the nostalgia.

So I believe I'll say goodbye after playing with her for 7 months - I can't say that she wasn't fun but I think I want the "slow, long, love making" of film and not the "wham bam thank you ma'am" of digital when it comes to rangefinder photography.

Cheers,
Dave :)

BTW: There's nothing wrong with folks using digital - it's just not what I'm into when it comes to rangefinders...
Click to expand...



Good to have you back, Dave.
And thanks for the link to that old thread. It was good reading, again.

(new oxymoron: digital archiving)
 
Last edited:
Hi, Dave...

Heading out the door but I thought I would wade in about something no one speaks much about when you are comparing your film and digital workflows. That is...your health.:eek:

For the last 10 years, I have been using the latest pro bodies from Nikon and finally got into the professional part which requires a lot of computer work after the shoot. Sometimes my PP takes as long as the shoot itself, and longer if I shot 1000 frames for a soccer match. I have spent the last 16 months recovering from nerve damage in my left arm which left me in horrendous pain, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Only in the last 3 months have I made tremendous gains in losing the pain, building back the lost muscle mass and re-gaining most of the function of my entire left arm and hand. ALL BECAUSE OF ENDLESS HOURS WORKING ON THE KEYBOARD AT THE COMPUTER!

Yeah, re-read that last part.

Nerve damage to your ulnar nerve comes from resting your elbows on chair arms, desks, etc. That is what happened to me.

Then, again, there is the "gettin' fat part", that occurs to all of us who spend too much time behind a keyboard. Just 11 months ago I went on a different diet for life, lost 48 pounds, began power walking 5 miles/day, rehab with free weights, and now cycling. After 1000 miles of walking and changing my lifestyle (if that is what you call it), my health is better than it was 30 years ago!:p

In summary, digital I must do for clients and for some photography that just calls for it. But, I have found that film is liberating! I can spend less time behind this bloody computer and get myself out on the road doing something for ME for a change! Exercise, not Photoshop...heck, I can even spend more time shooting and STILL get in my daily exercise.

Sooooo...what took you so long to decide to ditch the digital part? LOL...:D
 
Yes, it's not about digital vs film.
Yes, it's all about options.

But it is up to *us* to keep the options alive. I am all groovy with digital, but I do not appreciate it when digital is used to deprive people from using film.

Thank you Dave for tipping the balance, probably without you realizing it. Many readers of this thread may end up helping to keep film photography alive, even thrive in the future. :)
 
I did the same thing. Although I never really stopped using my Leica MP, I bought a Nikon D200 and zoom lens and for about 6 months shot probably somewhere on the order of 2,000 pictures. Going back and looking through them, I saw 2,000 boring, lifeless photographs. By contrast, every roll of film I've ever put through my MP, either B&W or color, has had several very pleasing shots worthy of wall space in my home. They just have a texture and soul to them that my digital pics seemed to be lacking. Maybe this is due to the medium, or maybe it's a result of my comfort level with the tool used. Either way, film and my MP won out. So, I sold the entire D200 outfit and used part of the proceeds to buy another lens for my MP. I do have a small Canon digital P&S that I use for web uploads or when I just need a decent pocket camera, but for everything else I am using film. What I I hate, though, are the people who actually ridicule me for using film, like I am some sort of behind-the-times dinosaur. While shooting film is a lot more labor intensive, for me at least the picture making experience, as well as the final results on paper, are much more satisfying.

I just spent my lunch hour shooting a roll of Fuji Reala through a 1960's Ricoh 500 rangefinder that is on loan to me. What a blast!
 
Well I really can not see why it has to be either or. I run both film and digital M's and perfectly happy. Each have particular qualities both of which I value. In the current climate it would be very hard to exist just on film. Colour processing costs are high and quality unreliable. I do process and print my own black and white (got a couple of rolls rinsing as I write, but supplies of film and paper are limiting and choice is far less than it used to be. Its surviveable, but just using film i feel a little insecure. Somehow having both options I find reassuring.
Richard
 
Fred Burton said:
mpjmp, I hate to break this to you, but we ARE dinosaurs. :)
Click to expand...

Well, I suppose that makes sense. When I was five I wanted to be a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Used to set up little villages of PlaySkool figures and then trash them like Godzilla. Loads of fun!

If I could afford an M8.2 I would probably have one, but I still don't think I would ever sell the MP, if for nothing other than black and white photography.

Hey, I wonder if there are currently any photogs out there using two Lieca bodies strung around their necks simultaneously (like it was fashionable to do in the old days when dinosaurs roamed the Earth), but instead of one loaded with color and the other with B&W, or one with a wide lens mounted and the other with a tele, they would have one M8 and one film M (loaded with B&W, most likely)?
 
mpjmp said:
Well, I suppose that makes sense. When I was five I wanted to be a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Used to set up little villages of PlaySkool figures and then trash them like Godzilla. Loads of fun!

If I could afford an M8.2 I would probably have one, but I still don't think I would ever sell the MP, if for nothing other than black and white photography.

Hey, I wonder if there are currently any photogs out there using two Lieca bodies strung around their necks simultaneously (like it was fashionable to do in the old days when dinosaurs roamed the Earth), but instead of one loaded with color and the other with B&W, or one with a wide lens mounted and the other with a tele, they would have one M8 and one film M (loaded with B&W, most likely)?
Click to expand...

I do this from time to time, when i need both color and B&W, 35mm on the 8 and 50mm on the 7

I suppose you know which one i use for B&W.... :)
 
Hmmm...

Just noticed that the Nikon D3X just came out at $8000!!!:eek:

That is so FUNNY, that I cannot even respond to it. I am willing to bet that sooner or later, a fair number of real photographers are going to give up chasing the latest and greatest with their $$$ and realize how the digital world is sucking them dry and return to using film.

I have already done so, partly because I am sick and tired of losing so much on digital but also because the film experience just works better for me and my important work. For my clients, the $1200 D2X does just fine!

Heh, heh....$8000 for a D3X...Barnum was right...:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom