Rangefinders,finding out what I missed out on with digital photography

-doomed-

-doomed-

film is exciting
Local time
6:57 AM
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
794
Location
New Jersey
View My Gallery
If you had asked me 2 years ago if I would have been shooting film I'd have said no,if you asked me if id be developing my own film you'd have been looked at as though you have 5 heads. I was thinking about this the other day as I was developing a roll of HP5 in D76 after using my recently acquired zorki 1c and it occurred to me that I not only am using a camera that has no meter or autofocus ,i was processing my own images . I had been using my canon 20d exclusively with big zooms and AF ,internal meters and all sorts of electronic gizmos to help me make photos.I was always excited to look at the display ,see the result, and delete the "bad ones" . That never seemed fulfilling , at the end of the day there was a disconnect,no negatives, just .jpgs and raw files, where was the excitement all my friends had in using their DSLR's?

That disconnect left me wondering why do i do this? Enter the rangefinder, first the fixed lense canonet , then the Bessa R2a . Still the disconnect persisted , shooting C41 and dropping it off at the supermarket . I have plenty of prints and sleeved color negs, and even a few photo cd's but I had yet to discover what makes shooting film so fulfilling . Ready to give up from lack of funds to constantly develop c41 BW , I bought the minimum to develop black and white, did some reading,and then bought,shot,and developed my own roll of film. I was blown away ,holding that first roll up to the light after removing it from the reel . This was the moment I realized that film photography is for me , there is no disconnect, no contemplation about the overall process as to why I am doing this. The excitement of seeing the results untouched by anyone but me makes me run to shoot more film ,try different film .

I took a leap from digital to film , and im not really sure why I still have my 20d, I never felt more into photography than I do at this moment. The next step I feel is to try medium format and buy a better scanner(I realize this is a digital step , but the initial process is what I enjoy most). Id also like a well used M2 that works well or an M4 , not to jump on the Leica bandwagon but as an extension of my love for well engineered mechanical objects that refuse to die(i drove a 38 year old VW squareback daily two summers ago with nearly mechanical everything)

Well , i'll thank you for reading this ramble but I felt that I would share this with all of you as this forum has been a great resource and constant motivation to continue playing with film.
 
I did the same steps,
recently sold the Eos 10D, very good machine but I wasn't using it anymore..

I found he pleasures of film, from the first step,
holding a roll of film, it's not something vanishing like a digital image
(let's talk about it, if my hard drive fails I loose all the photos, backup excluded).

Photo is ON negative, and the negative is real.
I can process it by myself, with all the errors and satisfactions,
after scanning the negative I can treat it as a normal digital image.

And I find absolutely astonishing chemical prints, in my opinion are a step
above almost every print made from digital.


this is what I missed with digital photography:
the good taste of controlling the Process.

(and stop worring about backups)


goodnight


Matteo
 
-doomed- said:
The next step I feel is to try medium format and buy a better scanner
Click to expand...

You mean an enlarger, right? 🙂

I followed a similar path, and I assure you the feeling you get from your first contact sheet is like the one you got from your first developed negative, on steroids.
 
I came the same route and I feel the same way. Due to circumstances I have a good access to high quality cameras and even better lenses... but unfortunately all DSLR. At the moment they're wasted on me. I'm no pro, don't even think I'm that good, but enjoying photography and that's what matters. At that I found that my enjoyment increased several-fold a few years ago when I made "a switch" from DSLR to film gear (mostly rangefinder, but some MF as well, my Hassie is the God, you should definitely try MF!).
It's several things that attract me about film, too many to mention - starting from the fact that, well, I'm actually not saying "film is better than digital", it's that I personally suck at digital 🙂 Film gives me better character straight out of camera and I just go with it, as opposed to digital, where I think PP skills are important and most of the time some character injection is necessary. Then I enjoy shooting with RF, the whole stuff that people said and I used to think was just hot air, about special feel, perception by others, use on streets, framing (!) differences with SLR, etc, etc, etc. I also like the fact that I don't have to deal with countless digital "negatives" where my head is spinning, I'd rather pay more attention to what I'm shooting and how from the moment I see the scene to the moment I develop the film and scan it. My ratio of keeper shots film vs digital is incomparable and I don't have to go through 100's of files till I'm bored.

errrr... I'm not sure what I'm on about either 🙂 I just went with your thoughts.
 
Welcome to the club. Once you've absorbed enough silver through your skin from the used fixer you'll find yourself getting sick less often too. Silver is a potent antibiotic.

As for film SR's they're useful for macro work or the longer telephotos. No need to feel guilty about sticking a 180/2.8 Elmarit on a Leicaflex SL2.

http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
 
Last edited:
back alley said:
so, is it rangefinders or developing film that has brought you closer to photography?
cause there are film slrs out there too.

joe
Click to expand...

Both. When starting shooting film I started doing it with rangefinders coz I found a few old FSUs around and soon, hit by GAS, went further. (I like other types too, esp. MF and some compacts for convenience). For the type of photography I always aspired to do I found RF fitted like a glove. I started firing away in situations where I would abstain from pulling out (D)SLR. I felt the RF fitted me the way I fitted in the environment. I also like the viewfinder style better than SLR - less precise but more convenient for my type of framing, you know the good old plus everyone assigns to the RF.

Actually, I don't enjoy developing film as much as most people do around here. I like seeing the end results and trying different chems, but hate shaking the cans. I do it though and look at it as necessary evil.
 
I recently started going through all my boxes and boxes of medium format negatives and contact sheets. I'd sold the Hasselblad and lenses, and TLR's years ago. Now I'm shooting with an old Minolta Autocord again and posting some of my old medium format pictures on my blog http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com It's very liberating just carrying one camera, a small meter, and a spare roll or two of film.
 
Al Kaplan said:
I recently started going through all my boxes and boxes of medium format negatives and contact sheets. I'd sold the Hasselblad and lenses, and TLR's years ago. Now I'm shooting with an old Minolta Autocord again and posting some of my old medium format pictures on my blog http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com It's very liberating just carrying one camera, a small meter, and a spare roll or two of film.
Click to expand...

Nice shots there, Al! Let us know when you post some new stuff with your Autocord..
 
ludoo said:
You mean an enlarger, right? 🙂

I followed a similar path, and I assure you the feeling you get from your first contact sheet is like the one you got from your first developed negative, on steroids.
Click to expand...

Especially that first MF contact sheet & print. You feel like you could dip your fingers right into it.
 
Keith said:
Respectfully I have to disagree with that ... scanning and inkjet printing have their own place in the photographic process ... and in my opinion are not merely a second rate substitute for a traditional system that someone may not feel inclined to persue!
Click to expand...

Thank you. And I have recently seen prints made on some of the new baryta papers that are as good as anything I have ever seen from the wet process. Really quite beautiful.

Cheers...

Rem
 
Keith said:
Respectfully I have to disagree with that ... scanning and inkjet printing have their own place in the photographic process ... and in my opinion are not merely a second rate substitute for a traditional system that someone may not feel inclined to persue!

YMMV of course!
Click to expand...

Personally, I've reached my limit with scanning and inkjet printing. I will still scan like always, but I've just had it with crappy printers and software. A lightbulb with a lens in front of it just works so much better in every way.
 
Keith said:
Respectfully I have to disagree with that ... scanning and inkjet printing have their own place in the photographic process ... and in my opinion are not merely a second rate substitute for a traditional system that someone may not feel inclined to persue!

YMMV of course!
Click to expand...

Dear Keith,

I couldn't agree more.

'Second rate' is outrageous flattery...

(Sorry, couldn't resist. GOOD inkjet, with the right subject, paper and ink, is actually better than halide. But equally, silver halide with the right subject and treatment can wipe the floor with inkjet).

Cheers,

R.
 
Keith said:
Respectfully I have to disagree with that ... scanning and inkjet printing have their own place in the photographic process ... and in my opinion are not merely a second rate substitute for a traditional system that someone may not feel inclined to persue!

YMMV of course!
Click to expand...

Whether one is second rate or superior to the other, it's up to an individual who has done both. Those two views will never hold true as a generic statement.

Personally, I am in a holding pattern with the inkjet printing, until a better technology becomes commercially viable, the cost of a good inkjet print is too high for me.

Why? The frustration of dealing with clogged head, overhead in ink cartridges cost, that stupid-idiot-design that doesn't let clogged heads to be cleaned individually without wasting inks on the other good heads, etc. just makes me ill thinking about it. Don't even get me started with the amount of money I spend down the drain with no results to speak of.

Compare this with the darkroom:

I mix the developer, stop-bath, and fixer in 3 trays, do one or two test strips, and start printing. Most of the time, at the end of the session, I came out with two or three prints that I am happy with... and it's easy to make copies to experiment with toning, all I need is a notebook to jot down the parameters.

The darkroom makes me excited about making prints, the inkjet-way, so far, doesn't.
 
shadowfox said:
Why? The frustration of dealing with clogged head, overhead in ink cartridges cost, that stupid-idiot-design that doesn't let clogged heads to be cleaned individually without wasting inks on the other good heads, etc. just makes me ill thinking about it. Don't even get me started with the amount of money I spend down the drain with no results to speak of.

C
Click to expand...

Ah...a veteran of Epson printers. I know whereof you speak. I used to print BW on an Epson 1280 with aftermarket (MIS) pigment inks. Forget it. When the machine worked the results were spectacular, but I finally couldn't deal with the clogged heads any longer. In all fairness to Epson, that printer wasn't really designed for pigment inks, but still...

Two years ago I got an HP B9180, which uses pigment inks, and after having made countless BW and color prints in that time I have never messed with the printer for maintenance reasons, except to change ink cartridges.

Cheers...

Rem
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
A (possibly) unusual question about out-of-date film...
Replies
8
Views
480
Freakscene
Freakscene
A
A day out with the SL2-S
Replies
7
Views
442
Archiver
A
Roastchestnuts
M246 or M10M or....
Replies
3
Views
370
Roastchestnuts
Roastchestnuts
D
What ever happened to Swann?
Replies
12
Views
1K
wlewisiii
W
T
Film versus Digital, and vice versa
2 3
Replies
42
Views
3K
Tim Murphy
T
Back
Top Bottom