new generation of RF users

[foolproof]

I think film and film cameras are becoming hip in a countercultural kind of way.

hip?? ive been photographing for 2 1/2 years now, and i learnt from scratch with a manual nikon and film. i shoot film for me. if technology keeps going the way it is, scanners will get better and better. my negs will always be my negs. will a computer read tiffs/jpegs in 50years time? my negs will still be my negs. and ill still be able to scan them better than any digital camera can perform. dunno bout this 'hip' thing in fairness. i think thats a bit of an un-thoughtout statement to make.

 

[FrankS]

hip?? ive been photographing for 2 1/2 years now, and i learnt from scratch with a manual nikon and film. i shoot film for me. if technology keeps going the way it is, scanners will get better and better. my negs will always be my negs. will a computer read tiffs/jpegs in 50years time? my negs will still be my negs. and ill still be able to scan them better than any digital camera can perform. dunno bout this 'hip' thing in fairness. i think thats a bit of an un-thoughtout statement to make.

Foolproof, stating your contratr opinion is fine, that's what a discussion is. The put-down at the end of your post wasn't necessary IMO.

 

[ErnestoJL]

I just had a vision of us RF and film users busily rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. 🙂

May be this time Titanic moores safely in NY.

At the exhibition I´m now in Buenos Aires the club I belong to has a booth and is showing lots of ancient (even wood made view type) cameras. Curiously, young people (less than 30 y.o.) get to our place and ask about Photography courses... all of them are carrying small plastic digitals... they even ask if we are selling cameras...

Renaissance? hummmmm..... looks like!

Ernesto

 

[Bryce]

"The things they say are all so cold,
I hope I die before I get old"

 

[telenous]

hip?? ive been photographing for 2 1/2 years now, and i learnt from scratch with a manual nikon and film. i shoot film for me. if technology keeps going the way it is, scanners will get better and better. my negs will always be my negs. will a computer read tiffs/jpegs in 50years time? my negs will still be my negs. and ill still be able to scan them better than any digital camera can perform. dunno bout this 'hip' thing in fairness. i think thats a bit of an un-thoughtout statement to make.

Foolproof, you don't have to take this in a personal way just because you are young(-er). You may use film for your own reasons, as would most young photographers into rangefinders, and I applaud that, but that doesn't negate what I said. I most certainly think that film is or could be hip for some people (EDIT: young or not!), it would be just plain strange if it wasn't since it is very nearly a niche product these days. Don't you agree with as much?

 

[jonasv]

Foolproof, you don't have to take this in a personal way just because you are young(-er). You may use film for your own reasons, as would most young photographers into rangefinders, and I applaud that, but that doesn't negate what I said. I most certainly think that film is or could be hip for some people, it would be just plain strange if it wasn't since it is very nearly a niche product these days. Don't you agree with as much?

I would tend to disagree as well (without taking it personal at all). There's a thing that continues to annoy me in the general RFF attitude... The thought that rangefinders are mainly "nice mechanical objects" and "fun to use" and what-not; as if there are no real practical advantages for shooting a rangefinder. Sure, everyone can brabble something from a leica brochure "quiet, stealthy, ideal for street photography" and so on, but at the end of the day nobody really seems to believe in that either and say that SLR's and even digital is the way to go for important work, and rangefinders are about "the experience using them".

Frankly, I don't understand this at all. This is a rangefinder community! Is it so incredible to believe that young people like me might have made an actual consideration on choosing the right tools for the job, without any sense of nostalgia.

When there is a growth of rangefinder users I think cultural or "hipness" aspects should really be considered secondary, and the people at RFF (especially the people at RFF!) should have some more faith in the intrinsic qualities of rangefinder cameras.


There, I'm done ranting for now😉

 

[Andrew Sowerby]

I think that, like it or not, Lomography probably played a part in introducing younger people to the fun of using simple film cameras (e.g. zone focus, rangefinder, manual SLRs).

 

[foolproof]

i agree completely with the niche comment. i didnt mean to come across in a 'put down sense' (i really hate this unemotional form of communication called the internet sometimes. or txt messages for that matter) i wasnt out to lash at anyone, i just misinterpreted it a little bit....

 

[sf]

I'm probably a next generation user - 24 years old - and I'm not using RFs because I hope to be part of any rebellion. Or even that I am any sort of Luddite.

My path :

35mm P&S
35mm SLR
645 SLR Manual
645 SLR fully auto
4x5
35mm RF
645 RF

and I am staying with the 645 until something digital comes within my buying range. I'm an RF user because they are quiet, gentle, unobtrusive, efficient, well designed, and produce extremely sharp negs when used to their full potential. And that there is no blackout during shutter-release is a great thing. The RF design is simply the best.

 

[FrankS]

When there is a growth of rangefinder users I think cultural or "hipness" aspects should really be considered secondary, and the people at RFF (especially the people at RFF!) should have some more faith in the intrinsic qualities of rangefinder cameras.

The discussion was about the increase in use of film and RF cameras among younger users. It was suggested that "hipness" plays a factor in this phenomenon. Sociologically speaking, younger people are very much more prone to follow trends (cultural, fashion, etc) than older people. I don't think you can argue against this. It follows then that the "hipness" of film and RF camera use does play a factor in the increased use observed among young people.

 

[Tim Gray]

As one of those young people coming on and asking about advice on a new camera... **** I'm 27, I guess I don't count anymore...

In all seriousness, I've been shooting with a DSLR for about 3 years now and have really enjoyed it. I started off with a Canon Rebel figuring that if I stuck with things, I would have more lenses (accurate prediction) and that I would upgrade to a newer/better camera at some point (inaccurate prediction).

I really figured I'd get a 30D, but once it came out, it was a little underwhelming. The 5D looks really nice with the full frame sensor, but is so much money. And then it hit me that $3000 or even $1500 for a camera that is ultimately built to be disposable really sucks. I really don't want to be constantly upgrading or feel like I should be upgrading my camera all the time. I've got better thing to do. For now, my Digital rebel fits the bill for DSLR for me. I'll get a new one when this breaks (which it will).

At this point I started to think about film - buy a nice camera and be done with it.

The other big motivating factor for RF's is I notice I really don't take as many photos as I would like to because I don't have my camera on me. It's big. It's bulky. To get a decent non tele view, I can't use my 50mm (which is "compact"), I have to drag around my big 17-40 zoom, which quite frankly, can be a pain in the ass. No matter how convenient the digital workflow is or how great the lenses are, if it's sitting at home, pictures aren't getting made.

There are other factors of course. I like shooting in low light, and any thing above 1600 iso is impossible on digital cams AND you have to deal with faster shutter speeds. The idea of 1/15 at 3200 sounds fun. Shooting B&W is nice too. I know it gives you more flexibility shooting color and converting in post, but it takes the fun out of it. I don't want to endlessly tweak my pictures; I want to take them.

And so on.

I've loved shooting and learning on digital. The instant feedback really gelled with me and helped me learn the concepts. Digital still has it's place. I would imagine if I know I'm going to be shooting at an event and taking 100+ photos, the DSLR is coming along. It rocks for macro too. Also, anyway you cut it, scanning sucks.

I'm sure a lot of younger people feel the same way. In the market, digital has completely eclipsed film for still photography. It's a shame since they both have distinct advantages not found in the other medium. I think many of us who learned with digital are realizing that film does have a place still and is a great place to learn and practice photography. RF's fill a niche that don't really have an analogue in digital photography.

I just hope I can save up for and purchase a good film scanner before they're yanked off the market completely 🙂

Last comment -- I personally would *love* to see a nice 16 bit monochrome digital camera. That would be wicked, especially if it was a small form factor RF.

 

[Tim Gray]

Sorry for the extra post. Addressing the hipness comment: maybe, maybe not. I have no clue. I am for the most part isolated from hipness, trends, and cool young people (artists). The only people I see day in and day out are a metric butt-load of gruff technicians and goofy physicists and grad students.

Maybe it's some group psyche kind of thing that is affecting me 😛

 

[FrankS]

I am for the most part isolated from hipness, trends, and cool young people (artists). The only people I see day in and day out are a metric butt-load of gruff technicians and goofy physicists and grad students.

I'd say you are correct in this observation. 🙂

 

[SuitePhoto]

People definately react differently when I pull-out my little Bessa R, compared to my Canon 1D mkII. Tim is right, I would take a lot less pictures if I had to lug my 15 pound DSLR rig around all the time. I starting shooting with a DSLR at 23 with no intrest what so ever to shoot film. But after 3 years of shooting, and aquiring a pro-level DSLR to make money with, I started to feel like taking pictures was just too much of a production - unless someone was paying me.

Now that I have my little Bessa, I shoot a lot more and it has broke some bad habits that I developed with my DSLR - like shooting 200% more pictures than I need to during a job. And there is definately an old-school vibe that people like when they see it and realize that it's film. Friends around the dinner table tend to relax and as a result I've shoot some of the best portraits that I've ever produced.

Then there is the look of real B&W film photography. I have come close with my DSLR & Photoshop workflow, but not quite... The soul just doesn't seem to be there. Maybe the Bessa inspires me to look at a scene with a different mindset, which comes across with a moody-er look to the shots... All I can say is that I love the results.

I would never think about using film for a professional job unless requested, but for my personal/recreational shooting I'm a 100% convert to film - despite the fact that most people think I'm crazy.

 

[thelovecollect]

regarding the "hipness" factor as a student..

shooting film is no big deal since everyone at school has to do it..
but shooting large format..

if you lug around a 4x5 to do snapshots you are considered "hardcore" 😎

heh..

 

[sf]

Now that I have my little Bessa, I shoot a lot more and it has broke some bad habits that I developed with my DSLR - like shooting 200% more pictures than I need to during a job. And there is definately an old-school vibe that people like when they see it and realize that it's film. Friends around the dinner table tend to relax and as a result I've shoot some of the best portraits that I've ever produced.

I work with a guy that owns the D200 - and says that the greatest thing about the camera is that it makes it easy to take thousands of pictures very quickly. He took 2000+ images during an airshow.

I can understand the value of 5fps for getting those jets in flight, but the more is better concept with DSLR users is certainly something we do not share with them.

Shooting with my old Pentax 645nII, I I found that I would blow through rolls of film very quickly and that I wasn't getting my money's worth per roll as I did with my manual Mamiya 645E. The RF645 is quicker than the 645E, but it's focusing and framing requires more thought - which makes it slower in some instances. I like this, and it has returned the thought to my practice.

 

[Tim Gray]

I can understand the value of 5fps for getting those jets in flight, but the more is better concept with DSLR users is certainly something we do not share with them.

I think this is something that is very common in amateur photographers, both enthusiasts and normal people alike. I'm sure its common with pro's too, but I can't say for sure. We *can* take a billion pictures, but should we?

One of the great things about digital is that each picture is "free" -- it's also one of the worst things about it.

No matter why we use cameras (professionally or otherwise), I think 1 great picture from an event is going to be more valuable than 20 blah ones.

 

[Fred]

Apologies in advance but.....

This is an interesting thread, it started out as a discussion as to the possible resurgence of RF cameras by the 'younger' photographer but as usual in so many discussions seems to have plumetted to the film v pixel debate which from the original post was not the intention.

....rant over..sorry..

I had a job recentluy to take some photo's for my works, for that and the expedient workflow I used an SLR, the viewfinder was so small and dull compared to my regular RF camera (Bessa R) that framing and focussing became a chore for me, the direct view of the RF where you focus on what you want and can compose the full view for me is what I prefer. I'm sure that all ages once trying and using an RF can both appreciate the limitations and the advantages. Not sure its an age thing though, more of an art thing. These people would probably still have gone the RF route regardless of the media used for the capture.

 

[Fred]

Oh and forgot to mention that the cost of an RF is a lot more affordable than is used to be, which is nice. Hats off to FSU and CV for that.🙂

 

[Crasis]

I'm 23, and I guess with the new gen of RF users. I agree with everyone (jvx, Tim gray as examples), who say RFs are a practical tool chosen for their purposes.

**** being hip. 🙂