Anyone "Stayed loyal to film?" Let's hear your story.

[kenneth]

The originator of the thread Anyone "gone film?" Let's hear your story suggested I start my own thread for those souls who have never deserted film and yes I agreed with him that it was a good idea, well here it is. Please share your thoughts.

Since my introduction to the wonders of film and cameras in my early teens I have been addicted to exposing film though an assortment of different cameras and developing and printing it myself although for a good number of years I exposed Kodakchrome II 25 asa which I would send away to Hemel Hempstead. I did venture briefly into medium format but 35mm, especially Leica optics, produces all I need. If you are at all interested I am 62 now, my god I sound like the late Walter Poucher.

I raised the point on another thread about the digital process should not be referred to as photography or the resulting pictures called photographs- see The Concise Oxford Dictionary on the matter. I have always campaigned on the view that the digital process should not be referred to as photography but a separate form of artistic impression.

[Shadow Blaster]

Interesting comments, Kenneth, and BTW, I see your 62 and spot you another year. I agree that digital should be in its own category. It bothers me a lot that what you see in a digital photo can differ so greatly from the actual scene. I know that film can be criticized in a similar fashion,e.g. filters, etc., but digital introduces another order of magnitude with actual image manipulation. My staying with film is mostly an emotional "decision" as my intro to photography was from my grandfather, whom I adored. He was a serious amateur and shot both 35mm and medium format, primarily B&W, which he (and we) developed and printed. My purchase of a M7 last year, after years of Nikon SLRs, brought me back to my first camera, an Argus C3, which was a rangefinder. I thoroughly enjoy the Leica experience and am more than impressed with Leica lenses. I recently bought about 76 rolls of Kodachrome 64 which I am working my way thru and loving every minute of it.

Thanks for allowing me a pleasant reminiscence!

Best regards,
John S.

[kenneth]

John- So many parallels and good to hear your views. I went to M6, you M7. I was a confirmed Nikon SLR man for years as you were and as far as Kodachrome is concerned, well I used Kodachrome II 25 asa exclusively here in the UK for many years only swapping to Agfa CT18 50 asa when going to the Alps but since the demise of Kodachrome I have now devoted myself to B&W film and re learning all over again the wonders of home processing it is so rewarding. Out of interest did you see the great offer on Rollei -nee Agfa Film. £1.25 for 36 X 100 asa or 400 asa from AG

Rollei Film

[Shadow Blaster]

Originally Posted by kenneth

John- So many parallels and good to hear your views. I went to M6, you M7. I was a confirmed Nikon SLR man for years as you were and as far as Kodachrome is concerned, well I used Kodachrome II 25 asa exclusively here in the UK for many years only swapping to Agfa CT18 50 asa when going to the Alps but since the demise of Kodachrome I have now devoted myself to B&W film and re learning all over again the wonders of home processing it is so rewarding. Out of interest did you see the great offer on Rollei -nee Agfa Film. £1.25 for 36 X 100 asa or 400 asa from AG

Rollei Film

I'm not familiar with this film. What is your assessment of it? Thanks in advance.
John S.

[hamey]

As a 60 year old I am not about to change to Electronic image capture.
In the last few months I have had this constant ache about buying a DSLR and using it with my Leica R lenses, even went out and bought a Novoflex Eos to Leica adapter.

Last weekend I once again sat in my study viewing some of my wonderful slides, over 40 years of wonderful memories, 4hrs had elapsed, I was still totally in love with slides.
My Son and Daughter who only know Digital TV. playstation1,2,3 and games etc, admitted to the shear beauty of it, It's much better then the computer screen Dad, thank you children.

THANK GOODNESS I finally come back to my senses, and obviously been cured of my ache.

So no more Digital talk from me, I will continue to use my full frame 35mm film cannister that produce
those wonderful images THAT ARE, AND WILL BE EMBOSSED on that plastic and
Transparant wonder called FILM.

Long live Leica and slide film,.........SIMPLY CANNOT BE IMITATED.

Ken.

[kenneth]

Originally Posted by Shadow Blaster

I'm not familiar with this film. What is your assessment of it? Thanks in advance.
John S.

I read good reports about it but like you I have no experience of it. Matthew at Ag kindly sent me a complementary roll to try and someone on this forum reckoned that it developed really beautifully with Rodinal so I ordered a bottle as my usual Ilfosol-S is getting low. I will comment further when I have exposed the roll but that could take some time maybe you should speak to AG as they are a new company trying to establish themselves

Rollei Film

[kenneth]

Originally Posted by hamey

As a 60 year old I am not about to change to Electronic image capture.
In the last few months I have had this constant ache about buying a DSLR and using it with my Leica R lenses, even went out and bought a Novoflex Eos to Leica adapter.

Last weekend I once again sat in my study viewing some of my wonderful slides, over 40 years of wonderful memories, 4hrs had elapsed, I was still totally in love with slides.
My Son and Daughter who only know Digital TV. playstation1,2,3 and games etc, admitted to the shear beauty of it, It's much better then the computer screen Dad, thank you children.

THANK GOODNESS I finally come back to my senses, and obviously been cured of my ache.

So no more Digital talk from me, I will continue to use my full frame 35mm film cannister that produce
those wonderful images THAT ARE, AND WILL BE EMBOSSED on that plastic and
Transparant wonder called FILM.

Long live Leica and slide film,.........SIMPLY CANNOT BE IMITATED.

Ken.

Ken Well put. I can relate to all of that. I tell people that there is possibly nothing finer in the medium of photography that Kodachrome II 25 asa slides taken with Leica optics projected onto a screen with a Leitz Pradovit projector. I am sure you are familiar with the late Galen Rowell and his wonderful mountain images on Kodachrome. He and it will be sadly missed

[AgXlove]

I don't own a digital camera. Why would I want a digital camera when I own an MP?

Until the M9 came along, there wasn't a digital camera that interested me. The M9 is a truly tempting camera, even with its distressing price.

Then I think of what $7000 would buy: An 18mm f/3.8 with viewfinder and $3000 worth of film (or a 21mm f/1.4 and $1000 worth of film).

Then I think of the truth that I'm going to spend that $7000, either on an M9 or on film and I start to wonder what's the best choice (again). The money will be spent, one way or the other. The only way to prevent that is to quit photography. I'd rather gouge my eyes out.

Film & processing is expensive. It seems you can have quality or low price, but you can't have both.

We get what we pay for - one way or the other.

[thomasw_]

Originally Posted by AgXlove

I don't own a digital camera. Why would I want a digital camera when I own an MP?...

I can not think of a reason as a hobbyist.

Originally Posted by AgXlove

...Film & processing is expensive. It seems you can have quality or low price, but you can't have both...

You will get quality and low cost if you process your own: so you can have both ;P

[earleygallery]

I've "stayed loyal to film" mostly because I just prefer it from an aesthetic point of view. I also like using the cameras I already own - I also like the fact that I can grab my film camera at a moments notice and use it - I don't have to make sure I've charged up the batteries first.

I have a couple of digital cameras as well, a P&S and a DSLR now which I use for specific purposes. The P&S is a good carry everywhere camera, useful if you happen to get a shot and don't then have to wait to finish a whole roll of film.

Digital photography is great and it can make economic sense if you are getting paid for you photography (I get the odd function or other request for work which digital is fine for) but IMO film is ultimately the better medium - that's my personal preference so don't tell me I'm wrong! If you prefer digital then you're right too!

I like choosing particular films for their look, rather than thinking of applying photoshop filters/actions afterwards - OK digital gives you the advantage of shooting a RAW image and then doing whatever you want with it in PP so you don't have to make any choices in advance, but deciding on a film and shooting according to what you have loaded in your camera is a more disciplined approach.

I have the best of both worlds. A negative/transparency which has proven archival properties. I will also have a scan and final image on my hard drive. I can print traditionally or - as tends to be the case - on my inkjet.

Annoyingly the typical standard of commercial D&P services seems to have deteriorated significantly in the last few years, and I've started to process my own B&W films again, but still use the 1hr places to get C41 processed only. I can imagine many photographers have chosen the digital route because of problems with or lack of processing facilities.

As an aside, I mentioned Leica to a friend I was with on the 9th (the webcast was happening at the time) and he was amazed at the prices of the M9/S2 - being a non photographer he didn't understand the reasons and differences, but as I explained to him, not so long ago an aspiring pro could pick up a s/h Rollei or Bronica for a few hundred quid and produce images as good as anyone would need. Today they need to invest tens of thousands to be able to compete and have the necessary digital equipment (for a fashion or advertising photographer say).

In 1970 at the age of 23, I started with a NikonF 50mm and 28mm, Ilford and Kodak b/w.
Only very very limited qty of enlarging. Messing with the camera and meeting people made more fun than my small darkroom.

In 1973 I changed my hobby to windsurfing - no more 'serious' photography..... all pergamin enveloppes with films left somewhere in the cave....abandoned......

In 2006 a competition in the german MacUp magazine ranked my old pic as a winner and - bang - there ist was again, that feeling.....

Now, with 62 I'm more hungry than ever and b/w film is my media beside some very limited keepers with my Nikons D200 and D300....due to get the "eye" back as in the past......

No wet darkroom, just scanning but very lazy with Epson printing, because "messing" with cameras, meeting people........

Btw: my very first pic with the F:

locked away on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

my "best" in 2009:

JU52 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Thanks to Leica, b/w photography for me means RF photography, sorry Nikon...
and not digital conversions of color shots.

Cheers
Bernd

[Mongo Park]

Yes, I have stayed loyal to film. Grew up with my father shooting monochrome film on his Contax IIA and developing and printing at home. Currently have his Contax (now tuned by Henry Scherer) as well as an M2, M6 TTL and 2 R7 s and a host of lenses. Send all my film away for developing and printing - but about to start developing myself and then scanning (can't wait). Am not tempted by digital myself, although encourage my wife in her digital life (as well as in other things). She currently has 3 digital compacts and a Nikon DSLR - its great to see the pics soon after they are taken and to be able to change ISO settings whenever one desires. However, I've only used her DSLR for experimentation and don't think I'll ever own one. Film is likely to be around for a long long time and will certainly outlive me - so, thats it. FILM.

[christer]

Originally Posted by AgXlove

I don't own a digital camera. Why would I want a digital camera when I own an MP?.

I have a digital camera saved from my children's dustbin, and I use it to photograph things I sell on eBay. For me it has no other use, but for that it is handy.

[MacAulay]

I am loyal to film, certainly. I use Ms, Contax and Nikon rangefinders, Nikon SLRs, Mamiya and Bronica medium format cameras and a Crown Graphic. However, I also use an M8 and a D200. The fact that I use digital does not detract from my loyalty to film, and its peculiar qualities.

[kenneth]

Originally Posted by thomasw_

I can not think of a reason as a hobbyist.



You will get quality and low cost if you process your own: so you can have both ;P

Two very valid points as I am sure no one would condemn the digital process for it has it's uses and I can see it been a wonderful medium for photojournalists and wedding photographer but amateurs like you refer to including myself are not dependent on results for a livelihood

With regard to home processing. It is so inexpensive and simple and immensely satisfying to do, however incredibly difficult to master that it is perfect for the amateur. Interestingly, Ansel Adams wrote a marvelous trilogy of books on the subject and it is interesting to note that book one is about the camera but books two and three are devoted to what happens once we have taken our photographs for it is this part of the photographic process that allows a photographer to fully exercise his skills and achieve his full potential. With the advent of the internet and forums like this one we are fortunate indeed to be able to tap into a vast skills data base as I am only too aware and am very grateful for the help and guidance offered by other forum members

[HouTexDavid]

I've stuck with film, though the siren call of digital has sometimes been tempting! Best cure for me of "digititis" was to buy my wife a Canon digital point & shoot. It was a small camera, should have been very simple, but came with a manual about as thick as a deck of cards. There must have been 500 features on that little devil - it frustrated me because I used the camera just seldom enough that I could not remember most of them. Then the blasted thing quit on me, so I was done with digital.

My MP has sent me back to basics in photography. I don't take a lot of exposures, but I enjoy the process. I have to think, and that's what I enjoy most about film and my camera. Just me, manual shutter speed, manual f-stop, and manual focus. Takes me longer to set it up, but I have fun with photography, instead of fumbling with a thousand-setting digi-wonder!

To be fair, I haven't given digital much of a try, but I'm happy with film - it has worked for me for 35 years!

David

[tmickan]

I started shooting Nikon SLR's, The F3 to be exact. From the F3 I downgraded to a Nikon D200, D2x, and then to a D3. By the time I owned the D2x and the D3, I also owned a Nikon F4 and F5. I also purchased a Leica IIIa/Summar 2/5cm just for a bit of fun, but I haven't put a rangefinder camera down since. I have now sold all of my Nikon equipment and shoot solely with a Leica MP and M7. As a working photographer, it just doesn't make sense for me to go back to digital. I shoot weddings, and the convenience of film is enough for me to continue with the medium. My wife also likes the extra fifteen hours a week that I no longer spend at my computer post processing. The look of film is what really impresses me and my clients however. The fact that I'm not just working to finance my next digicam upgrade is a bonus.

[AgXlove]

Originally Posted by tmickan

The fact that I'm not just working to finance my next digicam upgrade is a bonus.

That frees up funds for another M lens, doesn't it?

I still shoot with my Nikon F3hp - it is without question one of the greatest 35mm film SLRs ever made (IMHO). I think we could say the same for the FM2n too.

There's just something about those cameras...

[nikau]

Bernd - loved your JU52 photo, well observed!

[holmes]

I started as a kid using a Kodak camera and 127 film. This had the little red circle so you could see the exposure number. In Vietnam I really started with an Olympus Pen EE and black and white film. Finally back home and working as a police officer we had both Polaroid and 4x5 sheet film. Think of Polaroid as the instant digital of its age. In police work we switched to 35mm by this time. Canon AE 1P I think. For my self I was shooting 35mm and experimenting with 120. I received training at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other schools for the demanding tasks of trying to capture evidence.
For my own self I started shooting freelance editorial work and had an agency represent my work. I have had a number of photographs published in both college and high school textbooks. Some of my work has found its way to briefings and I did a layout, while working as an US Air Force Flight Instructor (basics). This required doing my duties as my flight's instructor and documenting the training cycle from day one to the last day, for a briefing at the Pentagon.
For several years I handled a photo lab and did crime scene photography for a police department following one retirement. I was still able to pursue my freelance work, no weddings please. Now in the last six years of full retirement, I go out and shoot what I want, 35mm or 120MF. And anything that looks interesting. I started using Leica Ms around 2003 with an M6TTL, and two M7s. In the past six months the R system has aroused my interest. I own two R6.2s and one R7, plus four nice lenses. In my bag you will generally find one 'M' and one 'R'. Of course I can switch it all around depending on what I'm after. If you've stayed with me this long you notice no mention of digital. At 66 years I see no reason to change.