lars_bergquist Posted August 21, 2010 Share #1 Posted August 21, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I started using film about when glass plates came off the market. Not that I ever used them -- I was in my early teens in the late 1940's. And I do still own a number of very competent film cameras, including a M4-P. But since 2006, digital M cameras have been what I work with. Last month, the sensor filter on my M9 cracked. (That was the origin of the thread Crack! in the M9 forum.) Today, August 21, I have not yet got it back from Solms. But -- even though I still have film in the freezer, all those film cameras have remained unused. I found that I simply do not want to go back to film, even when provoked by a seven week photographic abstinence. I do not want the bother. I do not want the inflexibility of a camera tied up with one particular film. I don't want the grain -- I have struggled for decades to get rid of it -- and I don't want the lack of resolution and the slow film speeds. I don't want the wait for results. In short, I have been claimed by the Great Digital Demon. I am and shall remain damned to the last of my days. Meanwhile, I find that digital has its own natural esthetics, and it is (predictably) different from both the large format and the 35mm film esthetics. People who try to make digital imitate film are as pathetic as the photographers of a century ago who tried make photography imitate etchings. It is different, and this old man is not too stuck in his rut to go with it. Hooray! for the life of a Bear. Maybe, maybe I shall have the M9 back next week. The irresponsible old man from the Age When Digital Meant Radio Valves Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 21, 2010 Posted August 21, 2010 Hi lars_bergquist, Take a look here A Farewell to Film. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
zlatkob Posted August 21, 2010 Share #2 Posted August 21, 2010 I agree! Digital is a dream come true. It offers immediate feedback and answers many issues of film, including dust, scratches, graininess and stinky chemicals. It represents some wonderful breakthroughs of engineering. At the same time, it is deeply connected with the history and tradition of photography. Photoshop, Lightroom and other programs beautifully incorporate and update numerous age-old tools and techniques. Film wasn't the thing that drew me to photography. It was a means to an end. I also agree about digital having its own esthetics, and film still being the way to obtain the true look of film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 21, 2010 Share #3 Posted August 21, 2010 ....People who try to make digital imitate film are as pathetic as the photographers of a century ago who tried make photography imitate etchings... It is often interesting to get some grain in B&W photographs. Not really imitating but trying to retain the best of both worlds. YMMV (Digilux 1 & Silver Efex) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejd Posted August 21, 2010 Share #4 Posted August 21, 2010 Dear Lars, I think that if I found myself in your position, enduring a seven week enforced abstinence, I would be inclined to buy myself an additional camera. Rgds, John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gotium Posted August 21, 2010 Share #5 Posted August 21, 2010 I am tempted to compose a thoughtful reply to you, but I am busy dusting and scanning my negatives just now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooky Posted August 22, 2010 Share #6 Posted August 22, 2010 I am tempted to compose a thoughtful reply to you, but I am busy dusting and scanning my negatives just now. And I my medium format and 35mm transparencies....from cameras that are from the early 70's and later still work, and the old transparencies look as good as the new ones. Some day I'll dump a boat-load of cash on digital,,,,,,,,some day. Time to turn on the light box.........ah, it's like magic! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted August 22, 2010 Share #7 Posted August 22, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sinner. Grain is the nectar of the photographic gods! But I am glad you have found your new groove! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gberger Posted August 22, 2010 Share #8 Posted August 22, 2010 Digital Photography is like shaved legs on a man - very smooth and clean but there is something acutely disconcerting about it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted August 22, 2010 Share #9 Posted August 22, 2010 ..... But -- even though I still have film in the freezer, all those film cameras have remained unused. I found that I simply do not want to go back to film, even when provoked by a seven week photographic abstinence. I do not want the bother. I do not want the inflexibility of a camera tied up with one particular film. I don't want the grain -- I have struggled for decades to get rid of it -- .... . . . . . . . . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted August 22, 2010 Share #10 Posted August 22, 2010 Digital is very convenient but still not perfect. Film has grain, digital has noise. Film needs careful exposure, while digital blown highlights can be a problem with high contrast scenics. If you don't like grain, Astia 100F is virtually grainless. Above all, film is reliable. I liked the quote elsewhere on this forum: "Film -- a new sensor for each image." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted August 22, 2010 Author Share #11 Posted August 22, 2010 Digital Photography is like shaved legs on a man - very smooth and clean but there is something acutely disconcerting about it. Artificial grain in a digital image is like a male in drag. Not my thing. Some people in 35mm photography developed a grain esthetic. The more the better, and the sharper the merrier. Tri-X souped, or cooked, in Rodinal was a preferred technique. I do not doubt that some digital photographers will in time develop a noise esthetic -- or rather, two: luminance and colour. Still, neither grain nor noise nor hail nor sleet will make a photograph more valuable, or "artistic". But a noise esthetic will at least be true to the medium. For all the good this does us in an age of simulation. The obstreperous old man who prefers mod.cons Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reiver Posted August 22, 2010 Share #12 Posted August 22, 2010 I came back to Film, 3 years ago, and bought my first Leica. Since a year I use the M8 too. Both is nice, but if i have to choose, its film that I would not miss. There are a lot of circumstances where digital is the better choice, but film gives me something, that digital can not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted August 22, 2010 Author Share #13 Posted August 22, 2010 Oops, here's a more accurate one: Artificial grain in a digital image is like a lady with hairy legs. Still not my thing. The same nasty sexist old man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted August 22, 2010 Share #14 Posted August 22, 2010 Digital Photography is like shaved legs on a man - very smooth and clean but there is something acutely disconcerting about it. LOL .... Good one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted August 22, 2010 Author Share #15 Posted August 22, 2010 I came back to Film, 3 years ago, and bought my first Leica. Since a year I use the M8 too. Both is nice, but if i have to choose, its film that I would not miss.There are a lot of circumstances where digital is the better choice, but film gives me something, that digital can not. I see. Is it the Holy Grain, or a feeling of being in communion with H.C.B.? The atheist old man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reiver Posted August 22, 2010 Share #16 Posted August 22, 2010 I see. Is it the Holy Grain, or a feeling of being in communion with H.C.B.? The atheist old man It is not the holy grain, my favorite film is still PanF, it is simply the pleasure to work with an analog system. Working with chemicals in a dark room is pleasure. Using my MP is pleasure, but I like both, digital and film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin_d Posted August 22, 2010 Share #17 Posted August 22, 2010 Call me a tactile person, I like to hold somethng tangible in my hands that I can say I have put a lot of thought and care into creating. Just a speculative thought, do we have any idea if an M8 or M9 will still be working in 60 years like the an M2 or M3? Just wondering . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted August 22, 2010 Share #18 Posted August 22, 2010 Digital Photography is like shaved legs on a man - very smooth and clean but there is something acutely disconcerting about it. That's a quote and I completely agree.... because it is mine! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 22, 2010 Share #19 Posted August 22, 2010 ...Working with chemicals in a dark room is pleasure.... Matter of tastes! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted August 22, 2010 Share #20 Posted August 22, 2010 I shot a lot of film for a 6 month period starting from the point my M8 went back to Solms in October of last year. Even though it came back in four weeks I still carried on shooting film throughout one of the worst winters in the UK for a decade. I just loved the way the grain added to the stark, grim look of streets in dark winter mornings. Then as spring gave way to more light and golden hues film began to look less attractive to the point where I too began to resent the grain and especially the wait to get my films processed and scanned. I sold both my film cameras (M7 and MP) and instead bought a Panasonic GF-1 as a backup to the loss of my M8 (should that happen again). Hope your M9 turns up again soon LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.