If it wasn't for digital ...

Keith

Keith

The best camera is one that still works!
Local time
7:27 AM
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
19,242
... I probably wouldn't be taking any photographs at all currently.

I'm working full time five days a week ... I start early and am seldom home before dark and there's no gas left in my tank when I do get home. Saturdays are full with the chores I don't have the time or energy for during the week and I usually spend Sat night and all Sunday at the GF's place, then home and get ready for work Monday morning and the whole cycle starts again.

I would personally rather be shooting film but I really can't stretch that far in finding the time or energy to do so ... digital (bless it) is keeping me in the loop until things change.

How many of us here are in this same boat where you would like to be shooting film but time and various commitments just don't allow it?
 
I was shooting digital and getting stuff done, but then I decided that chores, etc. could wait. My house is falling apart. My family complains, but I'm shooting a roll of film every two days and taking an hour a day for myself to develop and scan them. In the spring I plan on devoting 4 more hours a week to serious darkroom time, and getting some prints done.

In the past I have been all about how can I please those around me who depend on me to make their lives better. But the kids are both teens now, and need to pick up some of the slack. I'm gonna make sure that I am enriched by my own actions now, and shooting film is a part of that equation.

Let me tell you, I enacted this new philosophy this week, and so far, the backlash has been ... intense! Digital ain't so bad, eh?
 
My photography wouldn't be where it is today if it wasn't for digital.

If I was using film I'd be extremely conservative with my shots (as I was when I was younger and using film) and not learning as fast as I am with digital where I can take as many shots as I want and observing the cause and effect of each decision I make on the spot, pretty much.

I wouldn't be as comfortable as I am with colour grading and post-processing if it was wasn't for digital too.
 
Lax Jought said:
My photography wouldn't be where it is today if it wasn't for digital.

If I was using film I'd be extremely conservative with my shots (as I was when I was younger and using film) and not learning as fast as I am with digital where I can take as many shots as I watnt and observing the cause and effect of each decision I make on the spot, pretty much.

I wouldn't be as comfortable as I am with colour grading and post-processing if it was wasn't for digital too.
Click to expand...

Fortunately I am colorblind, so I needn't worry about all that color stuff. I never shot film conservatively, having come up when there was no viable alternative. Shoot like there is no tomorrow was - and is how to do it.
 
L1002547-Edit.jpg


I've worked about 60 hours most weeks since 2011 and have some time consuming care responsibilities. Without the Monochrom I'd never get any photography done.

Marty
 
I work most of the time, but take time out for a walk at lunchtime one to three days per week which is when I take most of my photos, and then at the weekend I take a camera most places but take only a few pictures. I was spending an hour or more each weekend collecting my negatives and scans. I don't have time for a darkroom and have no room either, and my wife doesn't want me wrecking the benches with chemicals etc. Digital became a time imperative, more than money imperative. With the number of shots I've taken on the M9 it has almost paid for itself in 18 months, but I have taken a whole lot more than I would with film. When I get a good subject I will fire away without a care to get the right composition. I tell myself I'll stick with film, and I will a bit, but I suspect I am over to digital almost entirely already and just not yet admitting it. I did really enjoy the weekend in Spring when I spent a couple of hours out with the Rolleiflex, but maybe 35mm film is behind me…..
 
-If it wasn't for digital I wouldn't have gotten a nice Nikon F100 for $40.00.
-If it wasn't for digital I wouldn't have been given my nice little Nikon FM2n
-If it wasn't for digital it would be easier to buy film!
 
Back in the 'sixties, we were told by many and sundry futurologists that the working week would be less than 30 hours, so we'd all need new interests to keep us from being bored.

Good job we haven't got things like digital cameras, then.

;)
 
Thinking about it, your Work Keith with the Merrills is absolutely STELLAR
Always brings a Smile to my Face and makes my jaw drop when looking at how Beautiful you make those files

You the 'Merrill' King !
 
helenhill said:
Thinking about it, your Work Keith with the Merrills is absolutely STELLAR
Always brings a Smile to my Face and makes my jaw drop when looking at how Beautiful you make those files

You the 'Merrill' King !
Click to expand...


You flatter me .... thank you sincerely Helen. :)
 
If it wasn't for digital I don't think I would have gotten back into photography. I started out shooting film in the 70's but kind of drifted away from photography in the mid 90s until digital renewed my interest about 10 years ago. Also credit digital for getting into shooting medium format and 4x5 as I wouldn't have gotten into either if it wasn't for film-digital hybrid workflow.
Shooting mostly with my M8 these days but I'm sure the itch to use my Crown Graphic will start up one of these days and I'll start using it again.
 
Keith said:
No one is stressing here John ... just expressing some feelings.
Click to expand...

Understood. Me too. I just don't worry about film vs. digital. I'm just happy that I live in a great city, that I have time to photograph, and that have A camera to use. Anything else is just icing on the cake.

There's no doubt that film cameras are a joy to use. There's also no doubt that there is a look to B&W film. However, I'm a color photographer, so digital just happens to be better for my wants/needs. High ISO has allowed me to get photos with deep depth of field in scenarios that would have required flash in the past.

Now, if digital did not exist, I would certainly be using film because I would not know any better. Sure, I'd be slower and I'd have to have a great scanner or darkroom to work with/in, but I would be perfectly fine using film. I think a Mamiya 6 would do the trick. :)
 
The only justification I have for stand development is that it gives me time to get the kids bathed and abed, and the chores done, while my film is stewing.

If it weren't for digital, I probably wouldn't shoot colour photos any more.
 
. . . . I would not be making pictures.
The film approach is too expensive, and I especially like the computer post-processing process :p that goes along with digital.

To the original point, I don't know how any photo hobbyist with career and family responsibilties in today's world can deal with making images on film. (If you can, that's amazing. )
 
I use my digital P&S for snapshots of the family or sometimes for work. Sometimes as the only camera I have as it isn't always easy for me to carry a film camera. But I long for MF and LF in the darkroom. sigh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom