Why do you still do film?

LesDMess · 09-28-2014, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by clicksworth

Nice chart. Do you have one like it for underexposure?

I have made full range exposures of all the film types I use so that I will know what to expect from them. How about you, what do you shoot?

**ChrisPlatt** · 09-28-2014, 10:17 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by clicksworth

Sold your digital cameras? A good digital is the best accessory for a real camera. It makes a good light meter, can be used to frame and take a few trial shots, record the date, time, and GPS location.
Once the developing is done it can be a fine negative scanner. Also good for testing the old lenses.

I'll bet you are the proud owner of a photo backpack.
OTOH I'd rather not lug around any more "accessories" than necessary.

The light meters built into my film cameras, used judiciously, work perfectly well.
For my cameras without I have two handhelds.
One weighs 1.7 ounces. The other is smaller and slides into the camera hot shoe.

Date, time and GPS location? You must be kidding!
Who needs it? I deal with enough insignificant information in my life.

Is a DSLR a better negative scanner than the Pakon F135+ I just bought?
It couldn't be faster, that's for sure.

As far as testing old lenses my film cameras work fine for that.
And no purple fringing!

Chris

clicksworth · 09-28-2014, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by LesDMess

I have made full range exposures of all the film types I use so that I will know what to expect from them. How about you, what do you shoot?

Black and white, but I am going to try making a chart like that for it.

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

I'll bet you are the proud owner of a photo backpack.
Date, time and GPS location? You must be kidding
Chris

Yes alright, I was kidding - a bit. Sometimes I just take an SV or Contaflex and wing it. Anything worth doing should be overdone.

LesDMess · 09-28-2014, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by clicksworth

Black and white, but I am going to try making a chart like that for it.

Definitely since your choice of film and developer will influence your results.

tuco · 09-28-2014, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by LesDMess

As a good light meter a DSLR is much too big. With some practice - and the huge latitude of most film like Kodak Portra 400 shown below, you won't need a light meter.

+1

Yeah a DSLR as a light meter seems completely daft. Why haul around such a huge light meter. Perhaps if you are also shooting digital that day then why not and for for people that still have to preview their shots, sure.

And I second you don't need a light meter at all for daytime shooting for some films. As LesDMess clearly shows the effect of 1/2 or even 1-stop difference in the placement of your middle gray exposure. All my daytime shots I have posted on BW film in the last 2 year have been without a light meter except for a few exceptions perhaps. And I think I get plenty of shadow and highlight detail in most of my shots.

wombat2go · 09-28-2014, 11:17 AM

These old ones were just taken "carry on" on the Australia trip and I did't miss the dslr at all.

However I helped set up a new Ipad air when there and I have to say its camera was most impressive, so well matched to the display too.

The darkroom/ basement here had asbestos abatement and is ready for new tiles so it will be a while before i can unpack all the C41 processing gear and process all the rolls I have.

Cuthbert · 09-29-2014, 06:40 AM

Originally posted by tuco

Why? She was paid good money for the job and signed a contract. I bet if someone took the picture that was used to make the poster and projected it onto a canvas, traced it by hand and proceeded to paint it in to make a poster with interpretation and drama added ( like all movie posters) she wouldn't say a thing. But soon as you do the same on a computer the game changes?

https://www.dosomething.org/news/5-celebrities-rejecting-hollywoods-photoshop-fever

Ok the next time I meet her I'll ask if she's OK if they transfer the fantasy boobs on canvas, then!

tuco · 09-29-2014, 07:04 AM

Originally posted by Cuthbert

https://www.dosomething.org/news/5-celebrities-rejecting-hollywoods-photoshop-fever

Ok the next time I meet her I'll ask if she's OK if they transfer the fantasy boobs on canvas, then!

Okay

henkvanzuylen · 09-29-2014, 10:30 PM

If you're not sure why it can be a great advantage to shoot on film, check this

Sightseer | Sightseer by Roger Minick

MD Optofonik · 09-30-2014, 01:08 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by henkvanzuylen

If you're not sure why it can be a great advantage to shoot on film, check this

Sightseer | Sightseer by Roger Minick

I just spent the last 30 minutes looking at his gallery and reading the essay and exhibit reviews. The early photographs are such a great document of those times. It really is a wonderful example of why shooting on film is so important. It also illustrates how digital technology can work so well with film today. Were it not for digital technology I and so many others who visit his page might not otherwise have the opportunity to view his photographs and because he used film his images will be available long after his website has disappeared into the digital ether.

**baro-nite** · 09-30-2014, 05:34 AM

Not only that, but giving out the polaroids was an important part of the project, too. Of course digital sharing is easy but it's not the same as handing over an actual print.

Cuthbert · 09-30-2014, 05:49 AM

Originally posted by baro-nite

Not only that, but giving out the polaroids was an important part of the project, too. Of course digital sharing is easy but it's not the same as handing over an actual print.

Agreed. Not to mention that it adds another parameter you can use to influence your pictures.

LesDMess · 10-03-2014, 02:55 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by stevebrot

Oh yes, I have seen it...several times. Barbarella flopped on its release but was picked up almost a decade later on cable where it gained its current notoriety. As for the sex symbol aspect...I was 13 in 1968 and what would I know?

Steve

Picture of Jane Fonda long before Barbarella, probably early to mid 50's?

LaHo · 10-06-2014, 05:36 AM - **5 Likes**

" Why do you still do film?" Well, one reason is all the different formats and cameras out there. The whole spectrum is much wider than what digital has to offer: sub-miniture to medium format, large format and plate cameras, and so many types: box, folder, range finder, SLR, TLR, view camera, toy camera ...
Recently I have been shooting with a Mamiya TLR from 1969 or thereabouts:

The Church of Our Lady, Copenhagen, Denmark with the famous "Christus" scultupe by Bertel Thorvaldsen vaguely seen in the unsharp background.

Camera: Mamiya C330 Professional
Lens: 135mm F4.5
Exposure: 1/60 @ F4.5
Film: Kodak Tri-X 400 iso dev. in ID-11 1:3
Light meter: Gossen Profisix

stevebrot · 10-06-2014, 09:18 AM

Originally posted by LaHo

Camera: Mamiya C330 Professional

That is one of the nicest TLRs ever made. Cool camera.

Steve

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why Do YOU Still Use Film SLR's?	dubiousone	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	68	10-22-2013 04:51 PM
Film roll - What do you do ?	Bandaid55	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	13	06-21-2013 12:54 PM
What lenses/gear do you still have from when you started?	ChooseAName	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	54	05-27-2013 08:51 AM
"Why do you still use M lenses?!"	jboyde	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	64	03-05-2011 02:57 AM
Do you scan your film? What do you use?	filmamigo	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	11	09-03-2008 07:58 PM

09-28-2014, 10:12 AM	#136
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	Originally posted by clicksworth Nice chart. Do you have one like it for underexposure? I have made full range exposures of all the film types I use so that I will know what to expect from them. How about you, what do you shoot?

09-28-2014, 10:17 AM - 1 Like	#137
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,694	Originally posted by clicksworth Sold your digital cameras? A good digital is the best accessory for a real camera. It makes a good light meter, can be used to frame and take a few trial shots, record the date, time, and GPS location. Once the developing is done it can be a fine negative scanner. Also good for testing the old lenses. I'll bet you are the proud owner of a photo backpack. OTOH I'd rather not lug around any more "accessories" than necessary. The light meters built into my film cameras, used judiciously, work perfectly well. For my cameras without I have two handhelds. One weighs 1.7 ounces. The other is smaller and slides into the camera hot shoe. Date, time and GPS location? You must be kidding! Who needs it? I deal with enough insignificant information in my life. Is a DSLR a better negative scanner than the Pakon F135+ I just bought? It couldn't be faster, that's for sure. As far as testing old lenses my film cameras work fine for that. And no purple fringing! Chris

09-28-2014, 10:42 AM	#138
clicksworth Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 150	Originally posted by LesDMess I have made full range exposures of all the film types I use so that I will know what to expect from them. How about you, what do you shoot? Black and white, but I am going to try making a chart like that for it. Originally posted by ChrisPlatt I'll bet you are the proud owner of a photo backpack. Date, time and GPS location? You must be kidding Chris Yes alright, I was kidding - a bit. Sometimes I just take an SV or Contaflex and wing it. Anything worth doing should be overdone.

09-28-2014, 10:56 AM	#139
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	Originally posted by clicksworth Black and white, but I am going to try making a chart like that for it. Definitely since your choice of film and developer will influence your results.

09-28-2014, 11:11 AM	#140
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by LesDMess As a good light meter a DSLR is much too big. With some practice - and the huge latitude of most film like Kodak Portra 400 shown below, you won't need a light meter. +1 Yeah a DSLR as a light meter seems completely daft. Why haul around such a huge light meter. Perhaps if you are also shooting digital that day then why not and for for people that still have to preview their shots, sure. And I second you don't need a light meter at all for daytime shooting for some films. As LesDMess clearly shows the effect of 1/2 or even 1-stop difference in the placement of your middle gray exposure. All my daytime shots I have posted on BW film in the last 2 year have been without a light meter except for a few exceptions perhaps. And I think I get plenty of shadow and highlight detail in most of my shots.

09-29-2014, 06:40 AM	#142
Cuthbert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,740	Originally posted by tuco Why? She was paid good money for the job and signed a contract. I bet if someone took the picture that was used to make the poster and projected it onto a canvas, traced it by hand and proceeded to paint it in to make a poster with interpretation and drama added ( like all movie posters) she wouldn't say a thing. But soon as you do the same on a computer the game changes? https://www.dosomething.org/news/5-celebrities-rejecting-hollywoods-photoshop-fever Ok the next time I meet her I'll ask if she's OK if they transfer the fantasy boobs on canvas, then!

09-29-2014, 07:04 AM	#143
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by Cuthbert https://www.dosomething.org/news/5-celebrities-rejecting-hollywoods-photoshop-fever Ok the next time I meet her I'll ask if she's OK if they transfer the fantasy boobs on canvas, then! Okay

09-29-2014, 10:30 PM	#144
henkvanzuylen Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Netherlands, 's-Hertogenbosch Posts: 457	If you're not sure why it can be a great advantage to shoot on film, check this Sightseer \| Sightseer by Roger Minick

09-30-2014, 01:08 AM - 1 Like	#145
MD Optofonik Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 962	Originally posted by henkvanzuylen If you're not sure why it can be a great advantage to shoot on film, check this Sightseer \| Sightseer by Roger Minick I just spent the last 30 minutes looking at his gallery and reading the essay and exhibit reviews. The early photographs are such a great document of those times. It really is a wonderful example of why shooting on film is so important. It also illustrates how digital technology can work so well with film today. Were it not for digital technology I and so many others who visit his page might not otherwise have the opportunity to view his photographs and because he used film his images will be available long after his website has disappeared into the digital ether.

09-30-2014, 05:34 AM	#146
baro-nite Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: North Carolina, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,294	Not only that, but giving out the polaroids was an important part of the project, too. Of course digital sharing is easy but it's not the same as handing over an actual print.

09-30-2014, 05:49 AM	#147
Cuthbert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,740	Originally posted by baro-nite Not only that, but giving out the polaroids was an important part of the project, too. Of course digital sharing is easy but it's not the same as handing over an actual print. Agreed. Not to mention that it adds another parameter you can use to influence your pictures.

10-03-2014, 02:55 PM - 1 Like	#148
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	Originally posted by stevebrot Oh yes, I have seen it...several times. Barbarella flopped on its release but was picked up almost a decade later on cable where it gained its current notoriety. As for the sex symbol aspect...I was 13 in 1968 and what would I know? Steve Picture of Jane Fonda long before Barbarella, probably early to mid 50's?

10-06-2014, 05:36 AM - 5 Likes	#149
LaHo Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Greater Copenhagen Area Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 430	" Why do you still do film?" Well, one reason is all the different formats and cameras out there. The whole spectrum is much wider than what digital has to offer: sub-miniture to medium format, large format and plate cameras, and so many types: box, folder, range finder, SLR, TLR, view camera, toy camera ... Recently I have been shooting with a Mamiya TLR from 1969 or thereabouts: The Church of Our Lady, Copenhagen, Denmark with the famous "Christus" scultupe by Bertel Thorvaldsen vaguely seen in the unsharp background. Camera: Mamiya C330 Professional Lens: 135mm F4.5 Exposure: 1/60 @ F4.5 Film: Kodak Tri-X 400 iso dev. in ID-11 1:3 Light meter: Gossen Profisix

10-06-2014, 09:18 AM	#150
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by LaHo Camera: Mamiya C330 Professional That is one of the nicest TLRs ever made. Cool camera. Steve