There's never been a better time than now to shoot film.

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There's never been a better time than now to shoot film - I mentioned this in another thread and thought it was worth making a new thread.

 

Why do I think it?

 

There is a great choice of films available. OK we've lost a few favourites but let's concentrate on what is available - lots of films that I've still yet to try even, and that's a big part of the fun, finding out how different films look. Go on, buy a 'new' film and give it a go!

 

Film equipment is such great value now - most Leica equipment holds its value very well and I don't think that M equipment has lost any real value, certainly not the lenses! But R equipment has never been better value. Look at other brands - Nikon F2's, Canon F's, Pentax etc. etc., superb manual focus lenses, and MF gear, grab a nice Rolleicord or flex, Bronica gear is particularly good value and Hasselblads can be picked up complete for less than the price of a s/h M body.

 

With some careful purchasing I reckon a pro quality 35mm camera body and a few lenses could be bought for under £200.

 

Processing - again there are plenty of places, maybe for some people it means posting films off to a pro lab and waiting a little longer for the results but there are decent high street outfits too like Snappy Snaps in the UK. If you want to try it yourself a basic B&W film processing kit is cheap, and it's easy to do. S/h darkroom equipment can be picked up for peanuts or even less! That said, quality items seem to fetch good prices on e bay, so it appears that even this tide is turning.

 

Hybrid processing - like a lot of film shooters I now mostly scan and print digitally. The best of both worlds. Shoot colour neg and you have so many options as to what you can do with your output, but traditional B&W film has a unique look that no amount of digital file manipulation can match. If you've never made a 'real' B&W print then treat yourself and be amazed.

 

Scanners are a problem now that the higher quality dedicated film scanners are so scarce, but it's a gap in the market that must surely be plugged soon? However, I do get perfectly good results from my Epson flatbed, and can scan all formats. I process my own B&W film, but with colour I have the film processed and scanned to CD only (no prints). I use the CD for proofs and web images, and re-scan individual frames which I want to print. Makes for a pretty easy workflow and I don't have to spend hours scanning every frame.

 

No, a scanned film image is not the same as just taking a digital shot in the first place!

 

The late John Hedgecoe said of digital photography in an interview with the AP before he died “It has really opened up photography to a lot more people, and made it easier for people to produce good images,” he told David Clark. “However, I think in some ways photography has become too easy. Many people don't really know how to operate a camera and just let it make all the creative decisions. In the past, you had to work hard to get a really good image, but now it's so much easier and that makes it much more difficult to be unique. Technology has made it less of a challenge and I think that has taken some of the magic and mystery out of photography.” - I think one of the greatest benefits of shooting film is that it provides a differentiation for the photographer and the viewer or client, and personally I think this will become ever more important.

[Marty]

Great positive post.

 

The problem is that you cannot convince anyone to shoot film anymore. IMO this time is not any better than the film days for shooting film. For £200 you can get nice digital equipment that is just as pro as the old film equipment that is now worth the same. If you want to be unique, be a good photographer. The fastest way to get there is to start out with digital. If that is the objective then I am sure that eventually one will stop using everything on auto and start thinking about the pictures. If many people don't really know how to operate a camera fair enough but it may be all they need.

 

I think the desire to shoot film in the digital age has to come from within oneself. It will be for very personal reasons. To spark interest in film I believe it is necessary to spark an interest in photography first, then the rest will follow.

[atlfoto]

" ...For £200 you can get nice digital equipment that is just as pro as the old film equipment that is now worth the same."

 

Are you kidding?.... C'mon.....

 

 

I agree, its time for film and I am enjoying it a lot!!

 

Regards,

 

Alejandro

[sjinouck]

i agree..

 

i shoot both film and digital..

 

digital slr, 35mm and mediumformat..

 

film is still everywhere available, and development and scanning doesn´t cost that much anymore..

 

a lot of times, i get 35mm and/or 120 camera´s for free, or at very low costs, with lenses, flashes,and so on..

 

i shoot all kinds of film..very nice!

 

i am very happy!..

[pico]

I must disagree. The best time to use film was before digital because I did not have people asking "Why film?"

 

Seriously, I am speaking from a distant and privileged position now because I retired from the Other low resolution media - newspaper photography and earlier magazine photography.

 

So perhaps it is best to say that this is a great time to use film unless you are a pro under pressure to publish NOW or ASAP.

 

I lift a cup of coffee to Slow Photography.

[SteveYork]

For a grand total less than 150 US dollars, I just picked up 2 contaflex iv with 50/2.8, 35/4 (two of these) and 85/4. The workmanship of this 50's stuff is superb, and the lenses are, not great, but pretty good. And one of the cameras was fully functional -- meter and everything.

 

But then I did something really dumb -- I sold 2 analog Ms and the 50mm Summilux ASPH I've owned since it was introduced. I was in one of those minimalist frames of mind. I still have one M w/ three lenses, but part of me regrets not keeping at least the lens.

 

We all do dumb things in life...but I need to forget about the loss and just go shoot more film.

[SteveYork]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And I just discovered that Costco still develops film for $1.59/roll. I don't have them print anything, because I scan it myself and then print what I want.

 

I was seriously considering getting out of film, because the local pro labs have just gotten so crazy expensive with the developing. It was $15/roll -- w/o regard to enlargements or copies -- or $5/roll develop only. I was dropping close to $1000 on coming back from each trip, and that's why I got my own scanner this Spring. I can handle $5/roll, but $1.59 is even better.

 

Of course, I could learn to do my own developing, but I really don't want to invest the time.

[Nikkor AIS]

I agree it's a great time to be shooting film. Despite having to endure those who think film is dead there are plenty of upsides to shooting using film.

Especially with Leica M film camera's

I agree with Early's gallery post.

The price of lightly used bodies being dumped by those on the digital bandwagon makes a compelling argument to shoot film in it self.

While KR 25 is ghost there are still a plethora of excellent color slides film out there, ready for the taking. I often load one body with slide film and cross process in C-41. The colors and look you get is out of this world.

 

 

And if money is tight you can always buy out of date film for a song and a dance. I recently went through a boxes of more than 10 year old Ektapress 100/160 that I got for $2.00 a roll. And I get my C-41 process for the time being at $4.00 a roll with a CD. What not to love.

 

 

Nikkor 28 1.4 AF-D on F3T with MD4 on 100 Ektapress Super Scan CD.

 

 

 

 

Leica 50 1.0 Noctilux@ 1.0 on M7 with 100 Ektapress.

 

And the selection of B+W has never been better with the exception of losing Tech Pan 25.

I just picked up some Rollie IR that Im really excited about shooting.

 

If your pressed for time and dont want to delvope and print/scan from home . Ektar 100 for color and XP2 for B+W is hard to beat. Finding a good lab at affordable prices is getting hard to do but they are out there.

 

I really have come to like Ektar 100 if expose it right the sharpness color and richness of color is really something.

 

 

50 1.0 Noctilux B+W ND filter @1.0 on Leica M7 taken on Ektar 100

 

I reeally think that film is here to stay. it's interesting to me as a long time film users to use a cross mixing of film and than scanning the negs. I really think if that getting out the good word about film and showing the images that go with it will go a long way to get film back into the hearts minds and hands of photographers.

 

 

 

Gregory

[jaapv]

I suppose you used a Leica UV filter on #2?

[bill]

And I just discovered that Costco still develops film for $1.59/roll. I don't have them print anything, because I scan it myself and then print what I want.

 

I was seriously considering getting out of film, because the local pro labs have just gotten so crazy expensive with the developing. It was $15/roll -- w/o regard to enlargements or copies -- or $5/roll develop only. I was dropping close to $1000 on coming back from each trip, and that's why I got my own scanner this Spring. I can handle $5/roll, but $1.59 is even better.

 

Of course, I could learn to do my own developing, but I really don't want to invest the time.

 

Steve, you have summed up my viewpoint in a nutshell. I pay £4.95 for developing in one hour, with a CD of high res jpgs (suitable for web use and proofing) and an index card. Anything worthwhile I scan myself at home.

 

Simples, as the Meerkat says.

 

In general, I absolutely agree with James - film is both here to stay, and is a good choice for the considered and creative photographer. One of the biggest things for me, by the way, is the discipline of shooting in monochrome. I know that I can desaturate digital files and scanned colour film, but it is not the same. If I know I have black and white film loaded, consciously or subconsciously, I go out to shoot monochrome subject matter. It's psychological, I know, but it is a game-changer for me.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[Michael Hiles]

Film (the material) has been constantly improving. SIlver paper has also been improving. And the extra time between pressing the button and seeing the result is not onerous - in fact there are some distinct advantages to taking your time. Assuming you do not have an editor yelling NOW.

 

I have a place that will do C41 (usually) while I wait, about 15 minutes. For some pricing reason, the last time I had a roll done, it was free. I suspect the pricing policy makers expected they would get me on the scans and prints.

[jmdco]

One cannot also forget the pleasure of the darkroom. The process of the end of the fingers, the beginning to the end. Light light, when you hold me.

[Stealth3kpl]

I pay £4.95 for developing in one hour, with a CD of high res jpgs (suitable for web use and proofing) and an index card.

Regards,

 

Bill

 

This sounds like a cracking deal. Where's this at? Do you have a link?

 

 

I've really enjoyed the results with my first 3 films through my M6. They're just holiday pics but they mean something to me. Memories etc, nothing fancy. I know I may as well just use a point and shoot for my snaps but somehow I'm finding film more involving and interesting at present. This is why I've put my M8.2 on a certain auction site. It's probably just a phase. One thing I'm really enjoying is walking around looking at my surroundings rather than peering at the back of my digital camera ensuring there are no clipped highlights. It's so relaxing just pushing the shutter button and moving on.

Pete

Picasa Web Albums - Peter - Brougham Cycle

Picasa Web Albums - Peter - M6 Annecy 0610

[bill]

This sounds like a cracking deal. Where's this at? Do you have a link?

 

Pete, it's Snappy Snaps! My local branch does the large scans for me at no extra cost because the guys who work there are intrigued by the cameras I use, particularly the II and III. In return for 5 minutes of enjoyable chat each time I drop in, I get a "premium service", that is the larger files for the same price as the standard (4-5mb) ones.

 

I suppose the lesson is that it is worth cultivating your suppliers

 

There are some nice shots in your links, btw, particularly those taken in Annecy.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[Stealth3kpl]

Thanks Bill. I'll keep a look out for Snappy Snaps.

Pete

[Nikkor AIS]

Okay, I'm going to back down now.

 

Andy, thank you very much for reinstating my thread.

I'm going to start posting my shots in the photo forum.

 

Gregory

[andybarton]

Thank you

 

Please post as many of your Leica shots as you like in the Photo section.

[hamey]

Film (slides) I use it all the time as it's my primary photographic capture.

 

The other is secondary as most of the time I can afford to delete, delete.

 

Ken.

[NZDavid]

Another ongoing advantage with film is archivability -- it's a real product, not just 1s and 0s on a magnetized file. I also find I take far fewer photos with film -- and that's a good thing, because I concentrate more. A whole different mindset. It's not necessarily a case of one is better than the other, just that these differences are real and effect both the approach to picture-taking and the results.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[plasticman]

I'm also really loving film again (well, the love never went away - just the cameras - which was one of the stupidest things I've ever done).

 

The look is completely different. Love it or loathe it, there's a special quality that stands out from the crowd of digital. Looking through Pete's images and then happening to look at similar landscapes in another (digital) thread reminded me again that the dimensionality, gentle grain, and graceful colors of film simply make for more charming and evocative images.

 

There may be more 'detail' or sharpness in the digital files, and no doubt the colors are more 'accurate', but these criteria are like criticising Andrea Mantegna because his colors are not 'realistic'.

 

And while I'm agnostic about the question of images in threads (why not the thumbnail technique that some other fora have implemented?), Gregory's images really do have a lyrical beauty that digital only approaches with much post-processing.

 

If I were a pro drowning in the flood of digital imagery overflowing from every possible source (even amateurs with P&S on flickr selling their images these days), right now I'd be highlighting my uniqueness by shooting film.