semi-ambivalent
Little to say
Film, because I recently saw a red Kodak clock-work darkroom timer in a museum display in Santa Fe, New Mexico, a timer I still use regularly in my darkroom.
Brian Atherton
Well-known
Film. Because it's ingrained in me (sorry). 
semrich
Well-known
Film, because, to me, shooting film is tactile, perceptible to the touch, from using the camera, loading the film, the feel of the film advancing, and at the end rewinding it.
It's touch alone, when the film is in the changing bag, feeling the turning of steel reels in one hand, film edges slightly curved running through the fingers of the other hand, loading and capping the developing tank.
Still touch, mixing the chemicals for developing, pouring, timing, emptying the tank, rolling the film off the reel, as the magic of images appear. Hanging, trimming, sleeving, inspecting, and moving a loupe around over the light box, and when you drag them out from time to time to pour over them for the "keeper" you missed the first time around.
It's another dimension of touch when you move into the darkroom, for those who do this, they know of the demands, the complexity that printing involves, but feeling that unique fiber print in your hands when done is like explaining the immeasurable.
I'll spare you the details of the tactile elements of using hand tools to make frames, cutting mats, and glazing, up to the point when you feel the framed print touch the wall, and you step back.
It's touch alone, when the film is in the changing bag, feeling the turning of steel reels in one hand, film edges slightly curved running through the fingers of the other hand, loading and capping the developing tank.
Still touch, mixing the chemicals for developing, pouring, timing, emptying the tank, rolling the film off the reel, as the magic of images appear. Hanging, trimming, sleeving, inspecting, and moving a loupe around over the light box, and when you drag them out from time to time to pour over them for the "keeper" you missed the first time around.
It's another dimension of touch when you move into the darkroom, for those who do this, they know of the demands, the complexity that printing involves, but feeling that unique fiber print in your hands when done is like explaining the immeasurable.
I'll spare you the details of the tactile elements of using hand tools to make frames, cutting mats, and glazing, up to the point when you feel the framed print touch the wall, and you step back.
shortstop
Well-known
poetic description. and, since photograph is a form of poetry, I agree completelyFilm, because, to me, shooting film is tactile, perceptible to the touch, from using the camera, loading the film, the feel of the film advancing, and at the end rewinding it. It's touch alone, when the film is in the changing bag, feeling the turning of steel reels in one hand, film edges slightly curved running through the fingers of the other hand, loading and capping the developing tank. Still touch, mixing the chemicals for developing, pouring, timing, emptying the tank, rolling the film off the reel, as the magic of images appear. Hanging, trimming, sleeving, inspecting, and moving a loupe around over the light box, and when you drag them out from time to time to pour over them for the "keeper" you missed the first time around. It's another dimension of touch when you move into the darkroom, for those who do this, they know of the demands the complexity of printing involves, but feeling that unique fiber in your hands when done is like explaining the immeasurable. I'll spare you the details of the tactile elements of using hand tools to make frames, cutting mats, and glazing, up to the point when you feel the framed print touch the wall, and you step back.
bsdunek
Old Guy with a Corgi
B&W with film.
Have an analog darkroom. Now that I'm old, I still like making B&W prints. It's my photographic roots!
Besides I have a nice sized garbage can in my darkroom! Ha!
Gosh, Bill, sounds just like me! After nearly 70 years of film & darkroom, I still love it.
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
Because I like shooting film, developing film and making prints from negs...
DNG
Film Friendly
I voted to convert (or just shoot in B&W mode) with my digital.
Because, if I had to choose a camera that would record the image, I choose a Digital for the versatility it offers.
Though I like shooting film, I can't afford it to be my main [only] camera, it is more of a break from digital.
Because, if I had to choose a camera that would record the image, I choose a Digital for the versatility it offers.
Though I like shooting film, I can't afford it to be my main [only] camera, it is more of a break from digital.
Bruno Gracia
Well-known
I wish to see an image out of the MM which remind me a film negative... Anyone? 
Vince Lupo
Whatever
I wish to see an image out of the MM which remind me a film negative... Anyone?![]()
Don't know if it's necessarily possible to illustrate that via a computer screen, but I'll try:

My Mother by Vince.Lupo, on Flickr

DC2013-2 by Vince.Lupo, on Flickr
I do know that the prints from both of these images (particularly the bottom shot) look as close to silver prints as I've ever seen.
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Wow, Vince,
The bottom shot does look a bit like film to me. That's from a Monochrom, eh? Regardless of digital/film, its a nice image.
The bottom shot does look a bit like film to me. That's from a Monochrom, eh? Regardless of digital/film, its a nice image.
Bruno Gracia
Well-known
Thanks Vince!
I don't know hoy to express... I need to see more grey, "metallic greys" like hp5 or neopan, and that dof.

Siesta por Bruno Gracia, en Flickr

Cerveceando por Bruno Gracia, en Flickr
Anyway I'm thinking again go back to MM and give up film, a little bit tired of scannig.
I don't know hoy to express... I need to see more grey, "metallic greys" like hp5 or neopan, and that dof.

Siesta por Bruno Gracia, en Flickr

Cerveceando por Bruno Gracia, en Flickr
Anyway I'm thinking again go back to MM and give up film, a little bit tired of scannig.
Pioneer
Veteran
I shoot BW film because I love the film and I love the cameras. I have used many of them for so long that they are literally a part of me. But all things in the human experience are subject to change. I am currently saving for a Monochrom so things may change for me as well.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Thanks Vince!
I don't know hoy to express... I need to see more grey, "metallic greys" like hp5 or neopan, and that dof.
Don't think that the DOF is particularly affected by the recording media -- I'd think it would be more the lens and chosen aperture than anything else. The two shots that I posted were both taken with an f/1 Noctilux wide open, so I think the depth-of-field would look more or less the same whether on film or digital.
On a somewhat related note, I just did a print judging this week, and I found out a few things:
Many of the digitally-captured images had very low resolution (at least in print form), for some odd reason. I'm one of those 'old school' types who like to stick their nose up to a print, and of the 150 or so prints I reviewed, I could only think of one that 'rewarded' me when I got up close;
People try to compensate by adding too much post-processing, thereby giving the print what one might call a 'digital look' (or trying to make it look more 'real' than real);
Despite all the digital bells, whistles and technological advances at our disposal, many people still can't make a decent print. Some seemed to be focused on using fancy papers (like silver/chrome finish etc) rather than trying to be successful at making a quality print first. Some were still having troubles with getting their exposure right when they had taken the photo, thereby affecting final image result.
My personal thought is that if you want to have a good digital print, back off on all the digital post-production (especially things like 'clarity' sliders). Make sure you can achieve a good, full-tone (and texture) in-focus image, and you should be fine. Oh and hopefully the picture itself is interesting!
KM-25
Well-known
Black and white film and paper will be around for a long time, more than likely longer than digital as we know it because the latter is constantly in self upgrade, self obsolete mode. So with photography bieng much more than a career or passion for me, I need a life partner in it and B&W film and the darkroom is just that.
I just can not imagine following the digital herd when something as genuine and artisian as the darkroom is still thriving. On top of all of that, even though digital prints are slowly gaining acceptance in some galleries, the value of a real silver print continues to climb and remain a popular choice in the higher end markets I sell in.
I can't see living my life any other way than real darkroom prints, I would give up photography entirely if digital were the only choice...
I just can not imagine following the digital herd when something as genuine and artisian as the darkroom is still thriving. On top of all of that, even though digital prints are slowly gaining acceptance in some galleries, the value of a real silver print continues to climb and remain a popular choice in the higher end markets I sell in.
I can't see living my life any other way than real darkroom prints, I would give up photography entirely if digital were the only choice...
starless
Well-known
Film over any digital camera any day. Pictures taken on film just look better to me.
shortstop
Well-known
Black and white film and paper will be around for a long time, more than likely longer than digital as we know it because the latter is constantly in self upgrade, self obsolete mode. So with photography bieng much more than a career or passion for me, I need a life partner in it and B&W film and the darkroom is just that. I just can not imagine following the digital herd when something as genuine and artisian as the darkroom is still thriving. On top of all of that, even though digital prints are slowly gaining acceptance in some galleries, the value of a real silver print continues to climb and remain a popular choice in the higher end markets I sell in. I can't see living my life any other way than real darkroom prints, I would give up photography entirely if digital were the only choice...
wise considerations. in one sentence: digital, where's the photo?
Vince Lupo
Whatever
I can't see living my life any other way than real darkroom prints, I would give up photography entirely if digital were the only choice...
You're like a modern-day Frederick Evans.
gb hill
Veteran
I shoot b&w film mostly because I can't afford a Leica Monochrome. If I could afford a digital I would lean strongly toward the Fuji XE-1 & lenses. But then again the thought of converting to b&w kinda turns me off. Now if Fuji would make a monochrome camera for the X system that would be the bomb. I just wonder how many would buy one.Amazing. Are there really more MM users out there than people who do the simple trick of converting digital shots into b&w? Hard to believe.
I find this interesting because I do not like converting to b&w and I do not really know why. I develop film now and scan just to avoid this (and for the benefit of being able to use a Leica)
My explanation (for my somewhat irrational step) is that when I pick up a camera that has a b&w film loaded, I somehow internally know I am doing b&w and that influences the mood, and the pictures I see. If if I firmly decided to convert all digital shot into b&w later, I think the thing would feel different.
But maybe I am wrong and it is only the Leica .... but then I might afford an M9, they are not that expensive any more.
I really do not know.
Then again on second thought, converting a digital file from colour ro B&W is probably much easier than scanning film which I admit is dreadful at times.
Compairing a b&w film look to a b&w digital look probably isn't really a fair evaluation because really what you are compairing to is one's PP ability in LR. I've noticed some conversions do have a film (natural) for me look while other b&w conversions have a strong B&W HDR feel to them & though I've got use to seeing this I prefer the more natural look that has a film like feel to it.
Bruno Gracia
Well-known
Don't think that the DOF is particularly affected by the recording media -- I'd think it would be more the lens and chosen aperture than anything else. The two shots that I posted were both taken with an f/1 Noctilux wide open, so I think the depth-of-field would look more or less the same whether on film or digital.
On a somewhat related note, I just did a print judging this week, and I found out a few things:
Many of the digitally-captured images had very low resolution (at least in print form), for some odd reason. I'm one of those 'old school' types who like to stick their nose up to a print, and of the 150 or so prints I reviewed, I could only think of one that 'rewarded' me when I got up close;
People try to compensate by adding too much post-processing, thereby giving the print what one might call a 'digital look' (or trying to make it look more 'real' than real);
Despite all the digital bells, whistles and technological advances at our disposal, many people still can't make a decent print. Some seemed to be focused on using fancy papers (like silver/chrome finish etc) rather than trying to be successful at making a quality print first. Some were still having troubles with getting their exposure right when they had taken the photo, thereby affecting final image result.
My personal thought is that if you want to have a good digital print, back off on all the digital post-production (especially things like 'clarity' sliders). Make sure you can achieve a good, full-tone (and texture) in-focus image, and you should be fine. Oh and hopefully the picture itself is interesting!
Thank You very much Vince I am right now studying photography at www.efti.es best school here in Spain and I've realized that it's quite difficult earn money working just in analog, despite I have an Imacon 848, hasselblad, leicas... So I'm thinking switch for... the 10 time? to digital and sell everything, buy my 3rd MM :bang: and live enjoying the life now that I'm learning how to use CS6 and LR properly and making final prints.
MM and Summarit range of lenses would be nice, due to the high ISO capabilities of the MM.
bhop73
Well-known
Am I allowed to be able to afford the monocrom + some lenses? If so, then i'll choose that, if not, b&w film because I can afford it.
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.