| Photography Forum: Philosophy Of Photography Forum: |
 |
Q. How many of you still use ONLY film?
Asked by José Azevedo
(K=9845) on 3/9/2007
|
Hi,
as a curiosity, I'd like to know how many of you, Usefilm contributors, still use film only.
I'm afraid I'm the last one of a dying breed :-)
On the other hand, I've seen many people running for MF cameras at another site's forum. They're mostly digital generation guys who decided to learn from film and also film users who went digital and back.
I believe digital is bringing special people to film. And film's far from dead. Fuji released a new Provia X and is also bringing Velvia 50 back. That's all I need. Specially because my cameras are all mechanical - no batteries needed :-)
Regards and thanks for your answers,
José Azevedo
PS - I've a digital - Canon S100. That's all I need plus the battery.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip D...
(K=391) - Comment Date 3/9/2007
|
I'm still all film. I develop the film my self and scan the negative.
I like to collect old cameras and use them.
I would say I am more of a collector then a photographer. I doubt I will switch to digital any time soon. My wife has goon digital and has a Pentax SLR, and she loves it.
|
|
|
|
Gayle's Eclectic Photos
(K=91109) - Comment Date 3/9/2007
|
hi, i only use film and have not bought a digital yet...i shoot with an older,but trusty Nikon N60...my favorite films are true B/W ilford,but usually shoot color films and convert to B/W in paintshop pro 8....i love the natural grains of film and a certain something about color films which i don't see in digital prints...at times i buy older,or off-brand color films just to see what quirky color casts are revealed on the print....regards,gayle
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 3/10/2007
|
Hi Philip,
I can't see why you wouldn't call yourself a photographer. Your images are so fine, you certainly've the eyes and vision for it.
I also appreciate very much your approach experimenting with older cameras. They give very nice results, unique results.
Congratulations!
Regards,
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 3/10/2007
|
Hi Ms. Gayle,
my two F2s and F3 are even older than your N60, prooof that, when it comes to age, Nikons are like wine.
I understand perfectly what you mean when you state "i love the natural grains of film and a certain something about color films which i don't see in digital prints".
And your experimenting approach is also worth mentioning it's film only possible. I doubt someone will buy older digital cameras to experiment with their older sensors :-) I still have Kodak Panatomic-X 32 ASA B&W film frozenm and cross processing color film is fantastic.
Nice to know I'm not alone. Finally, congratulations for your unique vision. Your portfolio is amazing!
Regards,
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
Clay Turtle
(K=-42) - Comment Date 3/15/2007
|
Strike film & scanner / enlarger freak . . . tried a friends digital, it is good but love shooting LF & enjoy mixing chemicals (dark room). Ya saw some cibrachrome kits the other day anyone know where I can get the paper to go with it?
|
|
|
|
Billy Bloggs
(K=51043) - Comment Date 4/17/2007
|
No you're certainly not alone, Jose. I'm old fashioned too. I still use film, colour & black and white, loaded into various Praktica cameras with manual focus lenses. I scan the negs myself. Some of the images in my portfolio are taken with a camera built in 1966, the most modern model of camera I use was bought new in 1992. I prefer the bokeh and the edge definition of film, as well as the look of the grain. I've no plans to go digital for the forseeable future, not until my collection of 20+ cameras die on me, or film gets too expensive.
Regards, Gary
|
|
|
|
Vincent K. Tylor
(K=7863) - Comment Date 6/3/2007
|
I still use film exclusively, but soon will be jumping into digital.
The elimination of scanning altogether is perhaps the biggest reason for me. But no film/developing costs, instant results, hundreds of images to a memory card, changing ASA speed mid-roll, editing on my 23 inch monitor along with a few other factors make the switch seem like a great idea.
The top of the line digital cameras today create outstanding, huge, clean digital files.
And NO SCANNING NEEDED.
|
|
|
|
Gayle's Eclectic Photos
(K=91109) - Comment Date 6/4/2007
|
sorry just now seeing your reply,Jose....thanks for compliment on my portfolio!...i am not here very much anymore,but hope to upload again in the near future....your work is a delight to view...film,baby,film!
best regards,gayle
|
|
|
|
Joe Johnson
(K=8529) - Comment Date 6/12/2007
|
"The top of the line digital cameras today create outstanding, huge, clean digital files."
Expensive, too. I don't know that a 10MP dSLR produces the detail of a slide, which can last in full color for decades if properly stored. And you don't know where that file will be later on, as DVDs and CDs may not have much of a shelf life, and HDs, even before they fail, can be unreadable as technology passes those particular drives by (I have some old drives, I still can figure out how to read without buying an ancient computer).
A shame it can't be both film and digital.
|
|
|
|
Maris Rusis
(K=30) - Comment Date 6/15/2007
|
I am committed to film or more generally to the use of light sensitive surfaces for making photographs because this is the only way true photographs can be made. Other methods involving photo-realist painting, mezzotint, gravure, offset printing, and analog and digital electronics can make pictures which appear to closely resemble photographs. But they do not have the special bond between subject and photograph and do not offer the special relationship between photograph and (perceptive!) viewer.
The true photograph is physically, irrevocably, and materially bound to its subject in the same way as a graphite rubbing, a footprint, or a silicone rubber cast. A real-world subject sends part of itself through a lens into a sensitive surface to make a picture of itself in that self same sensitive surface. Wow!
This physical nature of photography has serious consequences.
The photographic medium is utterly powerless in depicting subject matter that does not exist. It is an assurance I treasure.
The photographic medium requires that the subject and its photograph have to be in each others presence simultaneously and that they have to be directly and physically connected at the same (relativistically adjusted!) moment.
Photography can do nothing about subjects which may have existed in the past. The future is similarly closed to it. Photographs can only be exposed in the implacable present.
No photograph can go into subjects of the imagination, nor into the topography of dreams, nor address hallucinatory visions.
Photography cannot even get to grips with things which full well exist but are momentarily blocked from sight.
The sole source of all the energy for a photograph is the subject itself. The built-in chemical potential energy of the light sensitive materials employed is sufficient to generate the material substance the photograph is made of. External energy sources are not required. Remember, photography was invented in and works perfectly well in a world without electricity.
Plangently, none of the above strictures and limitations apply to paintings, print-outs, and other pictures that are fabricated from descriptions( mental, electronic, whatever)of subject matter rather than generated by the arrival of physical samples of subject matter.
It is these boundary conditions of photography, its limitations, its connectedness to the real if you like , that keep me committed to the medium. I will always use film even if I have to make it myself.
|
|
|
|
Leander Conferido
(K=10) - Comment Date 7/30/2007
|
I recently took up photography and I am using film to the disbelief of my freinds who are in digital photography and branded me as a purist. I did not regret not buying the D40x that I was suppose to buy. All I can say is photography is not about equipment, it is an art which interests me the most. Bought a lens from a guy a couple of days ago and he is using a D200 and when he showed me his Nikon, it was on Aperture priority and said that he dont shoot using manual. There is no doubt that a digital camera will outperform an film camera maybe 8 out of 10 but if I can think of an analogy for film it is this: a sailor 500 years ago navigating the world, looking only at the stars.
|
|
|
|
Steffen Uhlmann
(K=760) - Comment Date 1/5/2008
|
I am one of those guys too wo got into analoge photography by loosing the fun of digital shooting. Since I got into developing and printing on my own, my digital is only in use for sports photography where I need to take several shots (in my case... climbing).
I think, people are starting to go back to film more and more; I bet the prices for film cameras are rising again.
Personally, I've just bought a Pentacon Six in nov., so my gear is (except for my digital) only former German-Democratic Rep. film gear - Pentacon&Zeiss lenses and a Practica and a Pentacon cam.
Much more fun than Digital! 
|
|
|
|
Kurt Driver
(K=65) - Comment Date 7/1/2009
|
Add me to the list, we may be dinosaurs, but we can make beautiful pictures. I don't mind the digital sensors per say, but the manipulation turns me right off. With my Canon t 90 I don't do a lot of planning, but I do with my medium format photos (an rb67). I got an email the other day from a friend who wrote that he had shot 200 that day. He doesn't do any planning apart from deciding where and what to shoot. I guess I don't like the scattergun approach. Kurt
|
|
|
|
Saad Salem
(K=89003) - Comment Date 11/14/2009
|
with my due respect to everyone,
just asking how many of you still using MSX computer,Commodore Amiga,or even Pentium 1,2,or 3 laptops ?
all the photographers ,and I say all sooner or later will follow the technology of this or the incoming decade,
let me clarify this in a wider range,though it is very understandable,
large frame cameras with glass negative to
medium frame still with glass negatives to
various stages of development of the glass negative to
huge leap by Eastman plastic negative to
color photography to
SLR cameras pure manual to
semi automatic to
fully automatic to
digital cameras with small sensor to
digital with full sensor
this is very big headlines of the progress,
and with each progress the technology advances there a little or a large number of photographers who stay with a step back,but eventually they do follow the advancing step.
my question is why ?
so go and use digital and master it as early as you could ,cause I am so sure that you all will beat those who do their first step with digital.
stay well and fine all of you with my utmost respect.
|
|
|
|
Richard Ries
(K=511) - Comment Date 11/30/2009
|
"just asking how many of you still using MSX computer,Commodore Amiga,or even Pentium 1,2,or 3 laptops?"
None of them new-fangled 'puters for me! My TS-1000, Radio Shack Color Computers 1,2 & 3, and Model 100 are doing just fine, thank you!
As to film, I use it mostly. I got an itsy-bitsy digital camera for 15 years' at work. It is OK for snapshots, as long as the light is OK (or I can't see the screen) and the temperature is high enough -- if it's below 50*F or so, the "camera" shuts itself down. Oh, yeah, I need to carry a load of AAA cells, too. 
--Rich
I UseFilm!
|
|
|
|
|
