squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
That's precisely what I stopped doing. Like I said, I love digital and I do not have time for this. I am very experienced at all of the above and did it for years. I enjoyed it, but there isn't room for it in my life.
I admit it: I miss film
- Thread starter squirrel$$$bandit
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 82
- Views 8K
That's precisely what I stopped doing. Like I said, I love digital and I do not have time for this. I am very experienced at all of the above and did it for years. I enjoyed it, but there isn't room for it in my life.
ferider
Veteran
The M7 is special if I remember right, Harry. Contact DAG, he has replacement levers.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I believe it's a little trickier with the M7. I had Gerry at Kindermann do one for me a couple years ago, he did it quite cheaply. It looked and worked great.
Lilserenity
Well-known
Sounds like you pretty much have most of your own answers by reading your posts. Find an M4-P, get it fitted with an old style wind on lever as and when, for the best scans it sounds like a dev and scan place (NCPS -- even though I'm in the UK I've even heard they're good!), and maybe down the line get a Epson flatbed, even the older scanners like the 4870, 4490/4990's will turn in a good scan, they're excellent for 120, and I have seen some good colour scans from a 4490 too. That way you can choose whether to get scans as well once you have a flatbed.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Hey, Vicky, what's up! yeah, I originally had a V500, then upgraded to a Coolscan, which I later sold for an insane amount of money, thus helping to fund the M9. It was absolutely the right decision. But I think it would be nice to shoot film now and then, as a treat.
Lilserenity
Well-known
I'm all good thanks, yep the Coolscans are a whole bunch of money, I still have an old LS2000 (SCSI based) which is fab scanner but every year it needs a bit of maintenance but if that keeps it going, that's fine by me. I keep on seeing LS8000s at what I would call within reaching distance but then I think for that money I could go on holiday somewhere with my current kit, a bunch of film, have a great time, good food, good wine, and all the rest and get the pics processed at about the same money, and be all the richer for it. So I've stuck with my Epson for 120 and an 11 year old SCSI scanner for 35mm and no one has ever complained "Hmmm my pictures look bad!"
Anyway, I like your thinking and as I say, I think you kinda already know your answer 🙂
Vicky
raid
Dad Photographer
I am using almost 100% digital, but I will any day start using 50% film.
f16sunshine
Moderator
Actually I used to detest the epson v700 for 35mm using it only for 120. Then I figured it out 🙂
For Internet use it works just great. I even ordered some 8x10 prints through Aperture 3 that are more than acceptable. For a larger really nice print I would still send the neg out or wet print myself. I still think control of development at home is the greatest thing going for film. The little things like withholding agitation or giving a bit extra time are lost when sending out traditional B+W to a lab. Not to mention different developers effect on grain etc...
For Internet use it works just great. I even ordered some 8x10 prints through Aperture 3 that are more than acceptable. For a larger really nice print I would still send the neg out or wet print myself. I still think control of development at home is the greatest thing going for film. The little things like withholding agitation or giving a bit extra time are lost when sending out traditional B+W to a lab. Not to mention different developers effect on grain etc...
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
One of the reasons I switched to digi was that I was doing all of my major processing work post-scan anyway. I never could hold all that stuff in my head--what agitation at certain times would do, what films liked which developers...I ended up just going with Rodinal every time, getting a scan with decent tonality, and taking it from there. The immediacy of Lightroom is a real delight to me.
I did enjoy the panicked experimentation of home C41 and E6, but I rarely have a whole day to devote to psyching myself up, getting the sink and thermometers ready, and going for it.
I did enjoy the panicked experimentation of home C41 and E6, but I rarely have a whole day to devote to psyching myself up, getting the sink and thermometers ready, and going for it.
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
Regarding C-41 B/W, why not just shoot color negative C-41 and convert to B/W after the scan? It's cheaper than XP-2 Super and was also touched on in a recent thread here on RFF. You can also find bargain color films at druggists like Walgreens and CVS in the States, whose color accuracy is not important if converting to B/W. IIRC ISO400 color negative film gives a good grain-like appearance in B/W.
~Joe
~Joe
4deck71
Newbie
Isn't the Precision Camera deal better for us RFF'ers than North Coast (assuming you shoot color/c41)?
http://www.precision-camera.com/webmaster/forms/view.php?id=5
http://www.precision-camera.com/webmaster/forms/view.php?id=5
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
Said it before, I'll say it again -- time and cost savings with digital are an illusion.
I won't get into the merits of each - I think both have their place and their advantages.
But if you factor in the cost of hardware, and software, and especially your time in processing, enhancing, archiving and then RE-archiving (since technology changes over every 5-6 years and you have to have multiple backups, etc etc)...well, it's really 6 of one and half dozen of the other.
If you like film, you'll easily be able to work it into a digital environment and do both.
Having done this, I can only urge you to process yourself. You have way more control over both development and scanning...most photographers want that control to make their images their own.
I'd say if you're bound and determined to let a lab do everything for you, then go with Ilford's XP2 Super...a really nice C41 B&W film that prints and scans beautifully.
I won't get into the merits of each - I think both have their place and their advantages.
But if you factor in the cost of hardware, and software, and especially your time in processing, enhancing, archiving and then RE-archiving (since technology changes over every 5-6 years and you have to have multiple backups, etc etc)...well, it's really 6 of one and half dozen of the other.
If you like film, you'll easily be able to work it into a digital environment and do both.
Having done this, I can only urge you to process yourself. You have way more control over both development and scanning...most photographers want that control to make their images their own.
I'd say if you're bound and determined to let a lab do everything for you, then go with Ilford's XP2 Super...a really nice C41 B&W film that prints and scans beautifully.
rogerzilla
Well-known
Kodak BW400CN is wonderful stuff if you don't have time for developing. Commercial scans to CD tend to be fairly lo-res (or eye-wateringly expensive if hi-res) so you'll want a film scanner for the best stuff. I am very happy with my Reflecta (it's a German brand) Crystalscan 7200. Real-world resolution has been independently measured at about 3300ppi which is better than most; it gives a very good 17MP scan using the default 3600ppi, with no need for software sharpening.
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
wanna trade an m8 for an rd1?
we can trade back after you realize that film is too much work.
lorriman
Established
There is an unmentioned alternative work flow based on photographing negs with your DSLR. It's very quick compared to scanning and with batch processing on lightroom would be even faster. If you were to get a larger dev tank then your devving would be fairly quick too, so long as you have the patience to stack up a few rolls.
Rig up an old 1:1 50mm macro on a bellows with the slideholder they come with (make sure of that before you bid/buy) adapted to take a roll. For b&w you can simply point at any light source but for c41 I recommend a nice blue sky to get maximum light fidelity. Adjustable whitebalance on the DSLR is nice in order to tune to avoid the highlights in one of the RGB channels dipping too far in to noise-reduction territory (keeping in mind that the negative image means the highlights will be the darks).
I use an ancient but beautiful s-m-c pentax 50/4 which gives me no distortion, but lightroom could deal with that anyway. If the DSLR is 16MP then you may be able to reach the supposed maximum 8MP of film (halving the MPs to account for copying rez loss factor of 2).
Processing the negs has one manual step that for many images won't be needed (auto levels will do fine): curves. However curves are amazingly simple (as well as amazingly powerful). Any 5 minute guide on the net will get you up to speed if you don't already know how; and it's quick. If you take the images in RAW then you should (hopefully) have 14bit/16bit images and no risk of posterisation though in practice only severely under-exposed images would suffer from that even with jpegs.
You wouldn't get a contact sheet but the process is so quick I expect you wouldn't miss it. Equipment cost= practically zero if you take in to consideration resale value.
Rig up an old 1:1 50mm macro on a bellows with the slideholder they come with (make sure of that before you bid/buy) adapted to take a roll. For b&w you can simply point at any light source but for c41 I recommend a nice blue sky to get maximum light fidelity. Adjustable whitebalance on the DSLR is nice in order to tune to avoid the highlights in one of the RGB channels dipping too far in to noise-reduction territory (keeping in mind that the negative image means the highlights will be the darks).
I use an ancient but beautiful s-m-c pentax 50/4 which gives me no distortion, but lightroom could deal with that anyway. If the DSLR is 16MP then you may be able to reach the supposed maximum 8MP of film (halving the MPs to account for copying rez loss factor of 2).
Processing the negs has one manual step that for many images won't be needed (auto levels will do fine): curves. However curves are amazingly simple (as well as amazingly powerful). Any 5 minute guide on the net will get you up to speed if you don't already know how; and it's quick. If you take the images in RAW then you should (hopefully) have 14bit/16bit images and no risk of posterisation though in practice only severely under-exposed images would suffer from that even with jpegs.
You wouldn't get a contact sheet but the process is so quick I expect you wouldn't miss it. Equipment cost= practically zero if you take in to consideration resale value.
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
If you buy back into film gear, you will soon remember why you left it in the first place. But, you can always sell it again.
raid
Dad Photographer
I will look for a good film scanner that I can afford. This will be my next move. Film a wonderful medium, and using a 4/3 camera is a compromise, but is a good alternative.
Darshan
Well-known
I have developed a few rolls since Feb, and every time I try to do something different just to see if I like the results. That is the process I love the most.
I know I can do the same with digital in PS, but the process is not so rewarding.
I know I can do the same with digital in PS, but the process is not so rewarding.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I actually usually just take one photo of a subject, a la William Eggleston! Occasionally I wil snap a couple of extras if I have the chance. My film and digital techniques, in the field anyhow, are basically identical. One of the frustrations of film, in fact, was that I found it hard to get through a roll sometimes.
Anyway, thanks for all the good discussion. I'm goin' for it and will try not to get too annoyed. Will send out at first. I forgot about the DSLR scanning method--might well give it a shot! I do indeed have a 16mp Pentax and could set up a slide-copying rig on the cheap, I'm sure. Will do a bit of googling on the subject.
I will likely sell the M8, and if I ever have to send the M9 out for service, will just use another system, or film, for a couple of months. It's a drag having a camera unused in a drawer when I could have an M4-P and one or two cool new lenses for both M's.
Anyway, thanks for all the good discussion. I'm goin' for it and will try not to get too annoyed. Will send out at first. I forgot about the DSLR scanning method--might well give it a shot! I do indeed have a 16mp Pentax and could set up a slide-copying rig on the cheap, I'm sure. Will do a bit of googling on the subject.
I will likely sell the M8, and if I ever have to send the M9 out for service, will just use another system, or film, for a couple of months. It's a drag having a camera unused in a drawer when I could have an M4-P and one or two cool new lenses for both M's.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jamie123
Veteran
Am I not getting something here? From what you're saying it seems that for you the achilles heel of film is the processing and scanning process, right? So it seems clear to me that your best option would be to have processing and scans done by a lab.
