CalArts 99 Posted March 25, 2013 Share #21 Posted March 25, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, if we're getting existential then here's something that I can't quite put my finger on, but it exists for me.... Holding a new box of unexposed film has a certain delight to it. I think it's the fact that in your hand is the potential for some great things that may happen. I can't quite explain it, but when I select a few rolls of film to stick into my pocket there's this sort of child-like excitement and anticipation that I get from the potential of what will soon come. A roll of film, with its physical attributes (the printed box, the coated leader sticking out of the cassette; that unique smell that a fresh roll has), manifests a certain kind of pleasure just holding it in your hand. When I was younger I couldn't afford a lot of film and rationed it out like a child might do with candy. A roll of film in my pocket was like a stashed away piece of chocolate that I knew would bring me pleasure after I processed the film and looked at the frames. There was the anticipation of using it, the actual using of it (the enjoyable act of photographing), and then the final looking at the images part of it. There was also that nice feeling of security with a few rolls of film in my pocket as I went out to observe the world and to record what I saw and experienced. I still get that same kind of feeling today with a roll of film stashed away in my pocket. A reusable SD or CF card doesn't give me that same kind of anticipatory excitement that for some reason I still always get with a roll of unexposed film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 25, 2013 Posted March 25, 2013 Hi CalArts 99, Take a look here Why do I shoot Film?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AlanG Posted March 25, 2013 Share #22 Posted March 25, 2013 It's well known that you don't get the "journey not just the destination" aspect of modern film use, Alan, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't work for others. What do you mean "it is well known?" Are you somehow able to see into my head to know that I don't get pleasure from my journey whether with film or digital photography? I get that everyone does this for pleasure but that is not what he stated. He mysteriously said he did it because he could, that it was a lifestyle choice, and further said "Digital cameras have made it easy to take thousands of thoughtless pictures, hoping that maybe one will be decent, with no care whatsoever for the process of what makes a good photo." I simply think those statements are gobblygook and they don't respect the journey those other photographers may be on. Does shooting film somehow make your pictures more thoughtful and make you care about the process of what makes a good photo? Billions of "thoughtless" snapshots on film say otherwise. No, all shooting film says about you is you like shooting film or don't have access to a digital camera. As for finding enjoyment in the journey, that applies to almost anything. So? I don't think film photographers are masochists. BTW he asked, "What about you? Why do you shoot film, and if you don’t, why not?" So I hope you find it acceptable that I posted saying I shoot digital because it allows me to express myself better than I could with film...where I felt I hit a wall with the technology... despite considering myself quite educated and skilled with the process. This caused my journey to sometimes become too much of a struggle or a failure. Thus greatly diminishing the pleasure I was seeking from it. Whereas some might find the challenges of the film technology to be a reward in itself, I don't. There are also a lot of challenges in mastering the digital technology and I enjoy making progress on this. Is either journey one of simplicity or one full of challenges? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted March 25, 2013 Share #23 Posted March 25, 2013 Love the colours of these shots Andy. For my part, film rules (and rocks). Digital can look nice, too, but I am wondering if its perceived simplicity doesn't often mean that the results are quite poor. Poorly exposed images, blown highlights, inadequate/inappropriate or incompetent post-processing which prevents bringing out all/most of what that medium can offer. So is digital simpler or more difficult than shooting film? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted March 25, 2013 Share #24 Posted March 25, 2013 ... A reusable SD or CF card doesn't give me that same kind of anticipatory excitement that for some reason I still always get with a roll of unexposed film. That's an exceptionally good way of putting it. Regards, Bill Sent from another Galaxy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted March 26, 2013 Share #25 Posted March 26, 2013 ....snipped A reusable SD or CF card doesn't give me that same kind of anticipatory excitement that for some reason I still always get with a roll of unexposed film. CaArts99, I agree with much of what you said in your earlier post, in that I too get a buzz from the smell of fresh film and loading it, impatient to finish it and venture into the depths of the darkroom and ...... well you know the story - magic! However, I can and do get a similar buzz from loading up my camera bag with say 15 freshly formatted SD cards and jumping on a plane and shooting a new adventure, all without the hassle (I've had a few) of Customs and airport scans interfering with my films. Maybe it's a bit like sex. It's more 'in the mind' than we realize. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted March 26, 2013 Share #26 Posted March 26, 2013 I shot film for over 30 years, processing and printing my work in 4 self-designed darkrooms over that period. I fully transitioned to digital 4 years ago, and still print, mat and frame my own work. The pleasure of putting a finished print on the wall - on mine or someone else's - is still as rewarding as it's ever been, having controlled the entire process from picture capture to display. I love the journey and the destination; I can't have one without the other. My shooting and printing discipline has never wavered, regardless of medium. But two things have significantly changed as a result of going digital. First, I've gained enormous flexibility and efficiency in the processing and printing end, despite countless hours of darkroom efforts. And, I now shoot some color in addition to b/w, whereas I limited my darkroom work to the latter. This has presented a whole new learning curve, and I relish the opportunity to continually improve. The tools have changed, but my mindset and my end product goals have not. Different but terrific journeys; same destination. I find that I take roughly the same amount of photos on a given outing, film or digital (excluding large format film work...that's another discussion). Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted March 26, 2013 Share #27 Posted March 26, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) So is digital simpler or more difficult than shooting film? Perhaps both. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted March 26, 2013 Share #28 Posted March 26, 2013 I shoot film because I can and I enjoy the entire process of it from loading the camera to seeing the negatives come out of the soup. Carl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted March 26, 2013 Share #29 Posted March 26, 2013 It's kind of unfortunate these things have a tendency to always turn into a "film versus digital" type of dialog. Most people I know use multiple tools and media. fwiw, I use both digital and film with equal enthusiasm (although I'll freely admit my bias to what I personally see as the 'aesthetics of film.') But I stopped wet printing long ago primarily because I have access to RA-4 prints from a Lightjet (even though I also have access to dichro enlargers and a 52" Kreonite.) I do prefer the versatility I get from film scanning and digital editing. And I will sometimes decide on ink prints as the end product, too. But I oftentimes will originate with digital capture. It just depends on what I'm doing and what the project might demand; the project's logistics and the intended output. e.g., a project I did several years ago originated with film but was scanned and then displayed on a large digital screen as the final form for exhibition. It consisted of over 60 images which logistically was a problem in respect to wall space for conventional prints. As I already mentioned, I like what film looks like aesthetically and that's why I will often choose to use it. But whatever media is being used, it still has a specific "journey" involved (to quote Bill's post.) Digital or film, those 'journeys' obviously go beyond the actual materials but nonetheless the materials used are still part of that journey; how can they be otherwise? It's all part of the whole package of producing images. We all know this and it's part of the reason we might choose to use a Leica rangefinder over another make (and then of course we will end up arguing the virtues of that choice, too ) I think what's part of the problem with these dialogs is that they are primarily technically based. The reality is that anyone can be proficient technically with whatever media they use. The real job is to work on one's "way of seeing" (to quote John Berger.) That's the true challenge. The tech stuff is simply a logistical issue that is fairly easy to eventually deal with (but always easier to talk about.) But when we do talk about film, we should be able to discuss the nature of film (either existentially or empirically ) but not constantly in respect to digital. After all, this is a sub-forum that specifically titled: "Film Forum." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym911 Posted March 26, 2013 Share #30 Posted March 26, 2013 Just to add one additional reason I shoot film more often than Digital. When my M is loaded and I set off on my travel or photo shoot or whatever, I feel I have an instrument with me that is mechanically perfect. I dont worry about a few knocks or scrapes on the camera, I know it is always 'turned on'. I enjoy the smaller but hefty feel of the M in my hand. I have usually already set my aperture and shutter speed. Then the only thing I think about...the only thing, is framing and deciding on the right moment. When that comes, the pressing of the mechanical shutter has a marked value for me, the shot is taken. This particular moment is very satisfying for me, it is why I am into photography. No digital camera gives me this same satisfaction. And this is also a very relevant reason why I shoot film on a Leica M camera. best Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym911 Posted March 26, 2013 Share #31 Posted March 26, 2013 Paul mac thanks ...I use an epson flatbed 4990 ...it is simple but once you get to know how it works it can deliver tremendous quality. it is all about having even flat negatives and contrast control. i have a lot of experience on drum and flatbed scanners from my previous life....flatbed scanners are not necessarily inferior to drum. let me know if I can help further. andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnwolf Posted March 26, 2013 Share #32 Posted March 26, 2013 What about you? Why do you shoot film, and if you don’t, why not? About a month ago I bought an M4-P, thinking I'd get back into film, which I shot for a few decades way back when. Now I'm not so sure. At this point my issue is with all the variables in the film workflow--film, developer, development, and scanning. It is making the digital workflow look simple and consistent, by comparison. I know all those variables are considered opportunities by those who relish film. And I'm sure if I standardized, then things would become more routine. But since I've started this little experiment, my focus has shifted from making pictures to all the technical considerations associated with film. I'm honestly not sure if I want to give myself to mastering them. The other thing that has occurred to me is how much I enjoy the freedom of digital capture with small cameras. Sure it's good to slow down and be deliberate. But there's also something to be said for shooting freely--and I don't mean randomly--with little concern for cost or time. In her book "Bird by Bird," writer Annie Lamont says one key to successful writing is "shitty first drafts." For me, digital helps negate the internal censor that can limit creativity. And it makes for a better sketchbook approach to photography, which I enjoy. Anyway, this is some of what I'm personally going through now with film. I love everything about the M4-P--handling, framing, shooting. And I definitely prefer the look of black and white film. I'll give it a little more time. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted March 27, 2013 Share #33 Posted March 27, 2013 I have been shooting a ton of film for paid shoots lately and spending a lot of time in my darkroom. It's crazy, I have been talking for a couple years about bucking the trend in pro work and dumping digital and now it is really happening, very exciting! Last night, I was in my darkroom printing a show from 5PM to 9AM this morning, non-stop. It was like some drug infused bender but without the drugs, probably the most amazing time I have ever spent in a darkroom and the resulting prints as big as 20x24 are just sooooo nice! The more I listen to my gut instinct regarding my career, the better I feel and live because of it. I just can not see any reason for me to use digital anymore, it's totally pointless since what I am doing on film and in the darkroom has my entire heart in it and it shows. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torquinian Posted April 7, 2013 Share #34 Posted April 7, 2013 Love the colours of these shots Andy. For my part, film rules (and rocks). Digital can look nice, too, but I am wondering if its perceived simplicity doesn't often mean that the results are quite poor. Poorly exposed images, blown highlights, inadequate/inappropriate or incompetent post-processing which prevents bringing out all/most of what that medium can offer. I agree. The digital process is like the herring that lays a million eggs in the hope that two or three grow up to be fish. A friend of mine recently went on a two week holiday and came back with 1500 images . Also I like operating the old film cameras. I am a "digital denier". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsb Posted April 7, 2013 Share #35 Posted April 7, 2013 Why analog or film-based photograph? Because there is something that can only be described with words difficult. It is filled "more" authenticity beyond pixels and bytes. It is the experience of scarce resources simply makes something wonderful design in this world, the real world, away from the virtual. From the darkness of the photo lab or room of the projections we get a brilliant tangible experience in the form of a paper image or luminous slides. We exchange the solitude of the PC against this world of experience. This opens up a completely new world of experience group dynamics. This is essential to understand that. My 6.5 years old daughter during digital photo recordings, want to look at the image on the camera's screen as soon as possible, but then never asks to see the photos again. Instead, she asks, "When we look again the slides?", "Do you have framed the new slide film yet?" "May I help you with the frame, may I cut the slides?" Likewise, you look like paper prints again and again. For viewing of color prints or slides, the family comes together, very important to my daughter. Although she have a Samsung Digital camera with autofocus and has so much photographed, my little one would really understand the Leica IIIg of their own accord and exerts ever focusing, even without film. Young children feel the film based Photography offers one more than they understand until now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted April 7, 2013 Share #36 Posted April 7, 2013 Yesterday, I helped my mother sorting out some old stuff in the cellar. There was an old PC, which went to a neighbour. Before it went in the cellar, I had stored all data but didn't bother to look at the pictures. Then I found a box with old negatives, had a quick look and found they were family pictures from the 60s, I never saw in print. I will scan the best. It is like a time machine Stefan (As an unrelated side note - I also found a cheap Agfa "Click", where I took the roll film out, before it went away. A word of advice, never lick the sealing paper of a roll film, which has spent decades in a camera. I had wo wash my mouth out afterwards ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted April 8, 2013 Share #37 Posted April 8, 2013 There was an old PC, which went to a neighbour. Before it went in the cellar, I had stored all data but didn't bother to look at the pictures. Why not? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted April 8, 2013 Share #38 Posted April 8, 2013 ...When I was younger I couldn't afford a lot of film and rationed it out like a child might do with candy. A roll of film in my pocket was like a stashed away piece of chocolate that I knew would bring me pleasure after I processed the film and looked at the frames... I've been thinking about what you wrote for a while and concluded that the cost of using film was something I really didn't like. @Torquinian - As for someone coming back from vacation with 1500 photos...so? Did he get pleasure out of shooting them? Does his photography improve with practice? Gary Winogrand -"He died in 1984 at 56 and left about 250,000 undeveloped images behind, leading to curatorial confusion about his print and publishing intentions." http://www.sfexaminer.com/entertainment/2013/03/garry-winogrand-triumph-sfmoma Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted April 8, 2013 Share #39 Posted April 8, 2013 Why not? Because it is already too much material for a quick screening, although it covers a much shorter time span. Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted April 8, 2013 Share #40 Posted April 8, 2013 I have gone back to film big time not shot digital for about 6 months now, the big problem i see with digital is the throw away nature of it, in the future there is going to be a big hole is social documentation This big problem with digital is easily solved: don't throw it away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.