azzo Posted December 3, 2011 Share #41 Posted December 3, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) So sorry to say this but, it's not the quantity that counts, guys! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 Hi azzo, Take a look here 100% film based photography. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted December 3, 2011 Share #42 Posted December 3, 2011 Weddings must pay better over there than they do over here, if they can pay for assistants too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted December 3, 2011 Share #43 Posted December 3, 2011 So sorry to say this but, it's not the quantity that counts, guys! Money in quantity counts. And when you give Quality, you get Quantity. At least that's how I operate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebarnman Posted December 3, 2011 Share #44 Posted December 3, 2011 Do you have a website, I'd love to see your work... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio58 Posted December 3, 2011 Share #45 Posted December 3, 2011 So sorry to say this but, it's not the quantity that counts, guys! OK.. well my web site is outdated but have a look and tell me if you think the quality lacks. My clients that paid at the top end of the wedding market did not think so. As a RF guy which you may predominantly be, you are no doubt accustomed to slower, considered image making. Current wedding photography moves very quickly and plenty of high quality images are captured. To say that "it is not the quantity that counts" implies the absence of quality by virtue of the number of shots taken. That is judgemental. Here is one of the many quality images I made on a hectic wedding shoot in Paris. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/167666-100-film-based-photography/?do=findComment&comment=1861499'>More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted December 3, 2011 Share #46 Posted December 3, 2011 it feels good to see that some people are still using films passionately so i dont feel me alone. Im giggling to see the same people who defends digital. So much :D:D /one who sometimes use samsung galaxy s2 for photographing lol! Do I need to be treated in hospital as digital abuser? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebarnman Posted December 3, 2011 Share #47 Posted December 3, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) OK.. well my web site is outdated but have a look and tell me if you think the quality lacks. My clients that paid at the top end of the wedding market did not think so. As a RF guy which you may predominantly be, you are no doubt accustomed to slower, considered image making. Current wedding photography moves very quickly and plenty of high quality images are captured. To say that "it is not the quantity that counts" implies the absence of quality by virtue of the number of shots taken. That is judgemental.Here is one of the many quality images I made on a hectic wedding shoot in Paris. Love the image. All we use is film, then again, we're not photographing weddings... Welcome to Empire West Studios Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted December 3, 2011 Share #48 Posted December 3, 2011 Andy,I let my associate to deal with the PP stuff and I relax in the darkroom, reconnecting with real photography. It's what keeps me shooting. That's just me though. Alan, That's insane. Who cares about photography when something like this happens? Well it is how I earn a living so I have no choice but to care. Damage was about $100K. I added on to the house and did a lot of upgrades so I spent $200K on the rebuild. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio58 Posted December 3, 2011 Share #49 Posted December 3, 2011 Love the image. All we use is film, then again, we're not photographing weddings... Welcome to Empire West Studios Back when I was shooting weddings using Hasselblads (& 35 mm for some candids) I would take around 250 shots. The ability to shoot ten times as many shots has in no way resulted in a loss of quality. The opposite in fact Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christer Posted December 3, 2011 Share #50 Posted December 3, 2011 Why do you say that? Images for daily shooting and internet usage does carry the Leica look to those images...even when it's on the internet. All the images I've had scanned carry over that Leica look. This picture is straight out of my NEX 5n camera with the 18-55 mm zoom, only cropped and resized for this forum. For internet use with size limits like the one on this forum, I do not get better results with Leica lenses on the NEX or with Leica cameras using Leica lenses and film. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/167666-100-film-based-photography/?do=findComment&comment=1861528'>More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted December 3, 2011 Share #51 Posted December 3, 2011 Please don't forget that we're in the "Film" subforum. Unless I'm illiterate (which happens sometimes) Now I'm confused. Earlier you wrote... "Digital photographers, even the so-called experts (the same ones that never even shot film), probably never printed more then 35 inkjetprints in their life" Now you seem to be saying that you shoot 150,000 digital images a year. Do you consider yourself a digital expert or not? And if you do, do you hold yourself in the same contempt that you seem to hold other digital photographers? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted December 3, 2011 Share #52 Posted December 3, 2011 I have come in the course of this year to realize that the best way to improve my film photography on a Barnack is through the immediate feedback that my M9 provides. And the best way to improve my digital photography on the M9 is through the intuition and speed that a Barnack, with its utter simplicity, teaches best. That is to say, film and digital are two sides of the same great coin. Photography is photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted December 4, 2011 Share #53 Posted December 4, 2011 My hat is off to you guys who do weddings.... The only one I have done since my teens was in September for the New York Times as an editorial assignment, with a M3 / 50 Planar loaded with Portra 400 and my X100, now that was fun. Even though my wife has said go all film, I can't let go of two marque clients, shooting for the guy who wrote Steve Jobs biography and the advertising / marketing department for the local ski area, that stuff is really rewarding and pays great, so I will always have to shoot at least a little digital even though both let me shoot film for some things. I know what NB23 means about getting a lot out of just a few rolls of film though, it is soooo peaceful and contemplative, even in the heat of exciting subject matter. My stash of black and white alone could easily fetch enough to pay for an M9 / 35 FLE, not that I would do something as crazy as that... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 4, 2011 Share #54 Posted December 4, 2011 This picture is straight out of my NEX 5n camera with the 18-55 mm zoom, only cropped and resized for this forum. For internet use with size limits like the one on this forum, I do not get better results with Leica lenses on the NEX or with Leica cameras using Leica lenses and film.Well,it is pretty fuzzy with strange sharpening effects. I could get that with a whole lot lesser camera than the NEX. But I suspect a breakdown in the resizing technique needed for Internet display. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 4, 2011 Share #55 Posted December 4, 2011 OK.. well my web site is outdated but have a look and tell me if you think the quality lacks. My clients that paid at the top end of the wedding market did not think so. As a RF guy which you may predominantly be, you are no doubt accustomed to slower, considered image making. Current wedding photography moves very quickly and plenty of high quality images are captured. To say that "it is not the quantity that counts" implies the absence of quality by virtue of the number of shots taken. That is judgemental.Here is one of the many quality images I made on a hectic wedding shoot in Paris. That one scores on content I would say. I love that highly symbolic fountain . The technique and/or medium used to get there is irrelevant imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted December 4, 2011 Share #56 Posted December 4, 2011 That's one of the problems with digital technology: My peers who work digitally are always running from the grim reapers of digital: Hard drive failure, file corruption, disc damage, etc. It appears that they will be forever running from those demons. Back up hard drive "A" today with hard drives "B" and "C." Some day, hard drive "A" fails. "B" is now your primary, "C" is your secondary. Back up "C" with "D." Some day "C" fails. "D" is now your primary. Back up "D" with "E." Multiply that process by 2, 3, 4 or 5 - depending on how many hard drives full of images you have accumulated. Where does it all end? It never does. Compared to that, my black plasitc archival boxes full of negs and chromes are joyous masterpieces of simplicity. I have backup hard drives with my scanned film and original digital photos stored at home, at the office, at my brother's home 2 hours away, and at my daughter's home 2 days away. A catastrophic event such as fire or earthquake that destroys my home with all of my carefully organized and cataloged slides and negatives will not destroy my life's work. Whether your photos were originally made with film or with a digital camera, multiple backups are a not a bad idea if you value your work. Without digital technology I'd have no backups. With digital technology I have exact duplicates in multiple locations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted December 4, 2011 Share #57 Posted December 4, 2011 Weddings must pay better over there than they do over here, if they can pay for assistants too. Andy, the trick is to do 40 a year Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebarnman Posted December 4, 2011 Share #58 Posted December 4, 2011 This picture is straight out of my NEX 5n camera with the 18-55 mm zoom, only cropped and resized for this forum. For internet use with size limits like the one on this forum, I do not get better results with Leica lenses on the NEX or with Leica cameras using Leica lenses and film. I wonder if it's the way your working your image? In this case, you said you haven't done anything except sized and cropped. These images were all shot with my R9. There's a look I can see that's different. However, I don't know if this is a good example since these were all shot on film (all different types) and scanned. The only image on that site not shot with a Leica is the image in the "about" page. There is a difference in quality I can see that's different from the rest of the site. Leisuretime Photography I have read many lens makers feel once they achieve sharpness, contrast and resolution, there is nothing more a lens could do. I believe Leica has a different philosophy being there's more to image reproduction than just those three items. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Messsucherkamera Posted December 4, 2011 Author Share #59 Posted December 4, 2011 So you don't feel there is a need to back up film? Have you ever had a fire hose spray the room where all of your photos were stored? Fortunately the fire was put out quickly and most of my images were fairly well closed up. You've never had a client damage or lose an image? And nobody answered any of my questions or concerns about filing film, cross-indexing it, searching for the images and retrieving them, sending them to clients, and keeping track of it all. For those working photographers out there who are 100% film based, do you have commercial clients who will accept submission on film? How about stock sales? Starting in the mid 90s my clients required me to scan my film and submit the images in digital form. So I had the same issues and advantages of a digital workflow while using film to record the image. The importance of backing up your archive - whether it's digital or silver based - goes without saying. I've always backed up my images by making in camera duplicates. Scanned images can also serve as backups - but if the files are corrupted or a drive fails, there is always the safety net of the original image on film. The physical analog images on film is the foundation of the backup safety net. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddp Posted December 4, 2011 Share #60 Posted December 4, 2011 I can back Ned up on the wedding stuff...during the season, I'm a hired gun / second shooter. Typically 1000 -1200 shots per gig, and if I do 2 in a weekend that's easily close to 2500 shots. Hand the card over at the end of the night and that's pretty much it. The guys I'm working for tend to blow the shutters up on the 5DMKII's with the amount they shoot. One of these days I'll get back into a wet darkroom...I envy those who still can do it. Not an option right now. I'm lucky to have a very good local lab though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.