jamais
Established
Yes (medium format only).
Should I bother with film?
- Thread starter ecowarrior
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 150
- Views 20K
Samouraï
Well-known
Should you bother with fillm?
Will you regret it if film is unavailable in the future?
I consistently get images that are more indelible in my mind than anything I am able to achieve with digital. I don't know if that's the sugar pill effect or not, but my M3/DR combo has given me photos that are timeless and effortless in appearance, capturing loved ones who are gone with that special something that I haven't seen with in my bayer photos. Again, could be sugar pill.
Or maybe it's that I take one image with my film camera and feel that I have gotten it. Whereas I'll take 10 with my digital camera and still not be certain. I don't know how that works, but film seems a lot more forgiving than digital, still.
Will you regret it if film is unavailable in the future?
I consistently get images that are more indelible in my mind than anything I am able to achieve with digital. I don't know if that's the sugar pill effect or not, but my M3/DR combo has given me photos that are timeless and effortless in appearance, capturing loved ones who are gone with that special something that I haven't seen with in my bayer photos. Again, could be sugar pill.
Or maybe it's that I take one image with my film camera and feel that I have gotten it. Whereas I'll take 10 with my digital camera and still not be certain. I don't know how that works, but film seems a lot more forgiving than digital, still.
Particular
Disassembler, occasional reassembler
I hear you saying three things; 1. I want to shoot film. 2. I want a Leica/rangefinder. 3. I want to make prints in the darkroom. I would treat these as distinct challenges, that can also be answered individually. 1. There are lots of fun, cheap or expensive cameras out there of all shapes and sizes. You can always send film out. What is stopping you? 2. There are affordable digital alternatives, like the Rd-1 to get an idea if you like rangefinders. There is also nothing wrong with an m6. 3. I would take a course, or find a public darkroom, before dedicating your basement or attic. Working in a well laid out space is much more satisfying than improvising, and will help you build your confidence and skills. It will be a change of pace that you either love or hate. If you only take to one of these three, you will still have gained something.
EDIT: Is my m6 considered an old camera now?
EDIT: Is my m6 considered an old camera now?
CMur12
Veteran
Unless you are going pro, this isn't a practical decision; it's what you want to do. So practical considerations, for the most part, don't apply here.
I like the tangibility of film (negatives and slides) and shooting film is a different experience, which, in turn, affects outcome.
I would recommend medium format to make shooting film just that much more distinct from digital, as well as to afford you a superior image (relative to 35mm, anyway). Develop your film, scan and print on the computer. Then move on to your own darkroom if you are still so inclined. If your heart is really set on a Leica, then go 35mm.
I think that if you are interested, trying film is worth the experience, and you can access film equipment now at a relatively low price.
- Murray
I like the tangibility of film (negatives and slides) and shooting film is a different experience, which, in turn, affects outcome.
I would recommend medium format to make shooting film just that much more distinct from digital, as well as to afford you a superior image (relative to 35mm, anyway). Develop your film, scan and print on the computer. Then move on to your own darkroom if you are still so inclined. If your heart is really set on a Leica, then go 35mm.
I think that if you are interested, trying film is worth the experience, and you can access film equipment now at a relatively low price.
- Murray
philosli
Established
I do my own printing in a temporary darkroom that I need to set it up in a bathroom every time I want to print.
If you want to try darkroom printing, make sure you have enough time for it. In digital post processing adjusting contrast and exposure can be just a few mouse clicks. In a real darkroom getting a decent print may require hours of (laborious/tedious) work. It may even take multiple day-long sessions.
To me it is worth it. I like to hold a print in hand instead of just staring at a screen to appreciate a photograph.
If you want to try darkroom printing, make sure you have enough time for it. In digital post processing adjusting contrast and exposure can be just a few mouse clicks. In a real darkroom getting a decent print may require hours of (laborious/tedious) work. It may even take multiple day-long sessions.
To me it is worth it. I like to hold a print in hand instead of just staring at a screen to appreciate a photograph.
majid
Fazal Majid
You're setting yourself up for heartburn. Film, even the B&W kind, is getting increasingly scarce. Production lines are being shut down as the machinery is wearing out, and produciton volumes have fallen below the economic threshold of viability at the majors. At this rate, within 5-10 years film photography will be as exotic and inconvenient as wet-plate collodion is today.
Landberg
Well-known
2 years ago I sold all my digital gear and bought a Leica. 2 months ago I bought a x100s but sold it again. I just can't shot digital. The lcd-screen and the fear of battery's running out is holding me back. I keep looking at my pictures in my camera instead of taking photos. I have no problem with digital at all. I just don't like the lcd screen! I guess I will have to buy the M60!😉
leicapixie
Well-known
There is almost nothing like opening a tank and holding the wet film, now developed against the light.
I still get excited having developed film since the 60's.
The absolute magic is seeing your print develop in a tray.
Pure black magic!
On these two grounds go for it!
The archival part of Film is a real bonus.
I lost almost 2 years of images when a drive collapsed..
Film has a long archival life.
I like using my Digital. Love doing Film.
I still get excited having developed film since the 60's.
The absolute magic is seeing your print develop in a tray.
Pure black magic!
On these two grounds go for it!
The archival part of Film is a real bonus.
I lost almost 2 years of images when a drive collapsed..
Film has a long archival life.
I like using my Digital. Love doing Film.
KM-25
Well-known
Obviously, this is sarcasm.
Jaymz007
Member
I started to shoot film with Leica MP. Decided to take it a step farther and picked up a Leica M-A and a Leica M3. Learned to shoot without a meter. Picked up a plustek scanner and develop my own film. It is an experience that you either love to do or love to hate. There is a steep learning curve. I am not thinking about creating a darkroom with an enlarger but I think that is for later until I start messing with MF.
The Look of film is much different than digital but when you hit the exposure with the focus and composition and get what you envisioned, it is like love at first sight.
Try just changing bag with scanning first maybe thats the way to go.
The Look of film is much different than digital but when you hit the exposure with the focus and composition and get what you envisioned, it is like love at first sight.
Try just changing bag with scanning first maybe thats the way to go.
Ranchu
Veteran
Why would any of that mean someone shouldn't shoot film right now? Because of heartburn? People will always shoot film, even if it's exotic and inconvenient. Some other people won't.
🙂
konicaman
konicaman
+1
If you got a spare room that can be turned into a more permanent darkroom things are so much easier - still printing is a slow process and takes much more time mastering than developing of film.
And yes - starting with a cheap SLR would be my choice too.
That said, film, especially B/W, is great fun and the results can be very pleasing.
ferider
Veteran
Film is as affordable as it never was before, when you buy online.
Film equipment too, well with the exception of Leicas, maybe. Hard to believe how cheap equipment is that went for much more when new 30 years ago.
Anyways, since you are also interested in MF, probably the easiest and most rewarding way to get into film goes similar to this:
- get yourself a Hasselblad 500c or 500EL with back, WLF and chrome 80mm Planar
- an affordable flat-bed scanner
- try the above with some c41 film that you develop via mail
- get a changing bag, development tank, Rodinal, Fixer and some plastic fluid mixers
- start your own development with Tri-x, TMX or TMY
All of this should cost you 800-1000 US depending on the scanner.
You will be amazed once you see the big negatives. If you don't like it, sell the camera again at not much loss. If you like it, start thinking about wet printing.
Enjoy,
Roland.
Film equipment too, well with the exception of Leicas, maybe. Hard to believe how cheap equipment is that went for much more when new 30 years ago.
Anyways, since you are also interested in MF, probably the easiest and most rewarding way to get into film goes similar to this:
- get yourself a Hasselblad 500c or 500EL with back, WLF and chrome 80mm Planar
- an affordable flat-bed scanner
- try the above with some c41 film that you develop via mail
- get a changing bag, development tank, Rodinal, Fixer and some plastic fluid mixers
- start your own development with Tri-x, TMX or TMY
All of this should cost you 800-1000 US depending on the scanner.
You will be amazed once you see the big negatives. If you don't like it, sell the camera again at not much loss. If you like it, start thinking about wet printing.
Enjoy,
Roland.
mfogiel
Veteran
I will be blunt: do you know what you really want to photograph?
B&W is a world on its own. In its traditional, darkroom incarnation, it is quite substantially different from digital, like eating a Big Mac is different from eating a bistecca alla Fiorentina.
If you'd like to try it, I suggest you skip 35mm and go directly to a 6x6 or 6x7 format. In the darkroom, negative size is paramount. If you would like to push it even more and avoid buying an enlarger, get some cheap 5x7 or 8x10 camera, and make some contact prints to begin with.
Forget what you know about photography so far. This is going to be totally different.
B&W is a world on its own. In its traditional, darkroom incarnation, it is quite substantially different from digital, like eating a Big Mac is different from eating a bistecca alla Fiorentina.
If you'd like to try it, I suggest you skip 35mm and go directly to a 6x6 or 6x7 format. In the darkroom, negative size is paramount. If you would like to push it even more and avoid buying an enlarger, get some cheap 5x7 or 8x10 camera, and make some contact prints to begin with.
Forget what you know about photography so far. This is going to be totally different.
lynnb
Veteran
There are logical decisions and there are emotional decisions. Photography for me is about emotions. I like the emotion of film - give it a try and see how you feel. And I second the advice that you go straight into medium format. Negative size does make a difference. And I say that despite loving the results I get with my 35mm film gear.
John Bragg
Well-known
Not all the film market is contracting. Ilford are investing massively and Ferrania are re-starting.
John Bragg
Well-known
Go for film and you will be rewarded. Camera choice is not all important, although a Leica M6 is a lovely camera. The glass makes the image and something like a Nikon F5 or F100 can be had for bargain prices these days, and the money saved on the body can be used to buy a kit of prime lenses or a zoom or two.
Ranchu
Veteran
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
For what it's worth (and it might not be that much!) here are a couple of threads of mine from a couple or three years ago about working with film under difficult circumstances (and most certainly not involving wet printing).
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125026
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125027
What I'm trying to suggest by referencing the above is that film isn't that complex to work with and requires little in the way of dedicated space, mess or fuss as long as you avoid wet printing. (I'm not saying you should avoid wet printing but, rather, saying I've nothing useful to talk about with that as I don't do it.)
While it's not the only reason I still shoot film, one of the main reasons I do is to work with wonderful old cameras which would be useless without it. I like the cameras, I especially like RF cameras and I should never have really worked with them without a long period using film RFs, simply because (a) digital RFs were barely available when I started with RF photography (the Epson RD1 being the only exception); and (b) Leica digital RFs being too rich for my blood once they became available (except for very, very, recently under un-looked-for circumstances).
What I'm trying to say here is that you can get into film photography for very little expense, fuss or muss if you're prepared to forego wet printing. You can put together a compact and easy-to-use developing kit that packs away small and can be used in any kitchen or bathroom. You can use any camera that takes your fancy to shoot the film, develop it pretty much anywhere and scan it simply and quickly if you confine yourself to a "good-enough; cheap-enough" scanner (much smaller and cheaper if you confine yourself to 35mm).
If you find you like using film you can then go down either the "better scanner; better printer" hybrid workflow path or the wet printing path - or both. If you don't like it you've not spent much if you've bought a good camera and lens which will retain their resale value - which makes a Leica film camera actually look like a cheaper option in many circumstances.
If you especially want to do the above with a Leica camera and lens (personally, I did with an M3 and an Elmar-M 50mm/f2.8) you'll either regard that purchase as money well spent; or sell it off for pretty much what you bought it for.
I'd figure it as $200ish for buying the film / developing / scanning kit plus $1500 (or more, if you want more) for a good-condition film M and lens. If you don't like it you'll sell out again for, I'd guess, at worst $300 less than the total you paid. And really, to me, that's not much to spend figuring out whether you like it or not.
(Of course, if you do like the RF and film experience then the total cost is, well, um, the sky's the limit and perhaps not even that!)
...Mike
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125026
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125027
What I'm trying to suggest by referencing the above is that film isn't that complex to work with and requires little in the way of dedicated space, mess or fuss as long as you avoid wet printing. (I'm not saying you should avoid wet printing but, rather, saying I've nothing useful to talk about with that as I don't do it.)
While it's not the only reason I still shoot film, one of the main reasons I do is to work with wonderful old cameras which would be useless without it. I like the cameras, I especially like RF cameras and I should never have really worked with them without a long period using film RFs, simply because (a) digital RFs were barely available when I started with RF photography (the Epson RD1 being the only exception); and (b) Leica digital RFs being too rich for my blood once they became available (except for very, very, recently under un-looked-for circumstances).
What I'm trying to say here is that you can get into film photography for very little expense, fuss or muss if you're prepared to forego wet printing. You can put together a compact and easy-to-use developing kit that packs away small and can be used in any kitchen or bathroom. You can use any camera that takes your fancy to shoot the film, develop it pretty much anywhere and scan it simply and quickly if you confine yourself to a "good-enough; cheap-enough" scanner (much smaller and cheaper if you confine yourself to 35mm).
If you find you like using film you can then go down either the "better scanner; better printer" hybrid workflow path or the wet printing path - or both. If you don't like it you've not spent much if you've bought a good camera and lens which will retain their resale value - which makes a Leica film camera actually look like a cheaper option in many circumstances.
If you especially want to do the above with a Leica camera and lens (personally, I did with an M3 and an Elmar-M 50mm/f2.8) you'll either regard that purchase as money well spent; or sell it off for pretty much what you bought it for.
I'd figure it as $200ish for buying the film / developing / scanning kit plus $1500 (or more, if you want more) for a good-condition film M and lens. If you don't like it you'll sell out again for, I'd guess, at worst $300 less than the total you paid. And really, to me, that's not much to spend figuring out whether you like it or not.
(Of course, if you do like the RF and film experience then the total cost is, well, um, the sky's the limit and perhaps not even that!)
...Mike
leicapixie
Well-known
What digital gear are you using?
Perhaps if it is Canon, Nikon or Pentax, you can add a film body of same.
There may be problems if your gear shoots half frame not full frame!
Leica is certainly special but using Film, many cameras are equal or better.
I love my old M3 and Collapsible Summicron 50mm f2.0
Past 3 weeks using an assortment of SLR, 2 new gifts.
The cameras are not new!
Pentax Spotmatic 55mm 1.8.
Fuji SLR with a 50mm f1.9.
The suggestions of doing film and scanning only a good one.
I prepare files and others do the printing.
Wet darkroom is magic but tedious and slow..
OP said quite at home with digital, so i should think with a Photoshop.
Perhaps if it is Canon, Nikon or Pentax, you can add a film body of same.
There may be problems if your gear shoots half frame not full frame!
Leica is certainly special but using Film, many cameras are equal or better.
I love my old M3 and Collapsible Summicron 50mm f2.0
Past 3 weeks using an assortment of SLR, 2 new gifts.
The cameras are not new!
Pentax Spotmatic 55mm 1.8.
Fuji SLR with a 50mm f1.9.
The suggestions of doing film and scanning only a good one.
I prepare files and others do the printing.
Wet darkroom is magic but tedious and slow..
OP said quite at home with digital, so i should think with a Photoshop.
Similar threads
