Doc Henry Posted March 4, 2015 Share #241 Posted March 4, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Mijo, Bravo for your darkroom development and on photographic paper , better than inkjet, more nuance As for me, I can be considered as a lucky person because I have "white" room converted into "black" at night http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2795597-post29.html Best Henry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 4, 2015 Posted March 4, 2015 Hi Doc Henry, Take a look here what are the reasons we shoot film today?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
erl Posted March 4, 2015 Share #242 Posted March 4, 2015 I use a community darkroom to process my negatives and to print. When joined there was only a handful of people using the darkroom on a regular basis, most members join to only use the digital lab. There used to be days when I would be the only person in the darkroom for the entire day. Within the last couple of months I noticed that there are more and more people using the darkroom. It's to the point where the darkroom staff need to set up multiple stations for chemistry, so that everyone is not huddled around the same station. I'm not sure what's going on but it feels like more and more people are finding reasons to shoot film today. I am tempted to urge you, and the other 'community darkroom' users to each consider setting up your darkroom at home, if possible. Good used darkroom gear is available for a song and would totally avoid the 'log jam' effect that can occur in communal situations. Also, shared gear is rarely in good clean working condition for very long, a disincentive to good work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted March 4, 2015 Share #243 Posted March 4, 2015 Mijo, Bravo for your darkroom development and on photographic paper , better than inkjet, more nuanceAs for me, I can be considered as a lucky person because I have "white" room converted into "black" at night http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2795597-post29.html Best Henry Pleased to see you exploiting good old darkroom technology Henry, it is an experience of satisfaction and soul nurturing that cannot, IMO, be equalled. However, I cannot agree with your short comment, better than inkjet, more nuance. I have 50+ years experience in darkrooms and consider myself a very good darkroom printer, but I cannot match darkroom and desktop prints to each other. They both, like their camera counterparts, deliver quite different output. Not better, not worse, just different. Darkroom prints (well done) have a better appearance of black and white tones, but a much shorter dynamic range. Digital prints, whether sourced from film or file, have a much extended DR but somehow have less 'depth' that the darkroom prints with their shorter DR. Digital prints can appear too flat, often because there has been an attempt to exploit the full DR that is available. Catch 22! Depending on one's skill with a good digital printer, I believe it is possible to produce a superior digital print than darkroom, provided you exercise control to 'lose' some DR and thereby appear to gain some depth, that could be called contrast by some. However I still think darkroom prints still have the best black, especially if you are glazing on fibre based paper. I still have a rotary glazer, but rarely use it (shame on me). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mijo Posted March 5, 2015 Share #244 Posted March 5, 2015 I am tempted to urge you, and the other 'community darkroom' users to each consider setting up your darkroom at home, if possible. Good used darkroom gear is available for a song and would totally avoid the 'log jam' effect that can occur in communal situations. Also, shared gear is rarely in good clean working condition for very long, a disincentive to good work. I completely understand your statement. A majority of the staff at the community photo center are volunteers (they turn over frequently) and they are ussually the ones tasked with cleaning. The tanks, reels and trays are all questionable in terms of how clean they are. My biggest issue are other members within the darkroom (i.e. contaminating the chemistry by mxing up the tongs, opening up the enlarger while it's on focus, and a general lack of manners). I would have loved to set up a home darkroom, but the spousehammer was vehemently against it. Having another place to get away from the wife does have it's advvantages though... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lleo Posted March 5, 2015 Share #245 Posted March 5, 2015 Shooting film today. Put it in this way: "analogic" (what a horrible word) cameras have a soul, digitals don't. It's the same difference between living beings and androids. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonuk Posted April 6, 2015 Share #246 Posted April 6, 2015 It may not be with a Leica, but someone I know who is a top end fashion photographer (Calvin Klein,Louis Vuitton) only shoots film. He shoots 6x7 portra 400, process and contacts it, picks out his choices and has them hand printed to 16X12, then drum scans the print to delete blemishes and tweak colour in photoshop. My pro lab here in London is awaiting 700, yes, seven hundred rolls to process and contact from his last shoot, which is an editorial shoot. The colours and skin tones are very appealing from this process. I've been shooting professionally for 30 years, half film half digital. I always shoot film for myself but are bound to shoot digitally for work, although I'm adopting the process described above and my editors like the uniqueness of it, although their budgets don't and won't stretch that far, but these days it is important to have a little uniqueness, otherwise we're just like all the rest. Interestingly, I heard the photography curator of the Tate say that they still wet print their pictures. They simply can't trust digital for archiving. A friend has all her old childhood super 8 films. I wonder if in 40 years we can find our digital files? Archiving is a real issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted April 6, 2015 Share #247 Posted April 6, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Because I like the feeling of creating physical material, and not zero's and one's on a memory card. Because it forces me to think twice or more before I actually hit the shutter - hence it makes me take less pictures, which equals less editing and more time for shooting. Because I like the characteristics of film, and shooting a certain type of film for a project makes my images have a coherent look and representation, whereas on digital it is far to easy to "optimize" each and every picture which again results in non-coherent work and look. I also play electric guitars on analog tube amplifiers. Digital transistor amplifiers doesn't give me an experience. All those old analog tube amplifiers do. I work with technology on a daily basis, and have been a geek since I was 12 years old. Photography is an escape from technology for me, so, naturally, I don't want to spend my time fiddling around with bits and bytes when I'm off work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuthbert Posted April 6, 2015 Share #248 Posted April 6, 2015 I also play electric guitars on analog tube amplifiers. Digital transistor amplifiers doesn't give me an experience. All those old analog tube amplifiers do. I work with technology on a daily basis, and have been a geek since I was 12 years old. Photography is an escape from technology for me, so, naturally, I don't want to spend my time fiddling around with bits and bytes when I'm off work. I think today and yesterday almost all the serious guitarist use(d) valve amps, the only one who used transistor was Dimebag Darrell. What's your poison? I use a Marshall Slash and a Vox AC30, one of the last made in the UK in the late 90s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted April 6, 2015 Share #249 Posted April 6, 2015 I think today and yesterday almost all the serious guitarist use(d) valve amps, the only one who used transistor was Dimebag Darrell. What's your poison? I use a Marshall Slash and a Vox AC30, one of the last made in the UK in the late 90s. Marshall SL5 Combo for home practice. A fantastic sounding amp. I also have a Vox Night Train that I've changed all the tubes on to NOS tubes, and modded/added an fx-loop. It sounds great! My band practice amp is a Hughes & Kettner Tubemeister 36w. I prefer the Marshall and the Vox, but the H&K is a killer amp for the price, and loud, although maybe a bit sterile/clinical sounding at certain settings, and a bit dry sounding on the lower wattage settings (1w/5w/18w). I've always wanted a AC30. One of the older ones. They sound amazing when cranked Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuthbert Posted April 6, 2015 Share #250 Posted April 6, 2015 Yes the AC30, even the reissue of the 90s, is amazing, mine has the greenbacks so it sounds a little more modern than the classic model with bulldogs...however it's loud and it needs a good preamp like the DOD250 or a vintage Distortion plus to be cracked at "human" volume, otherwise it's just clean. Not that being clean is a bad thing, it's the best clean tone I've ever heard...BTW now a lot of Hi Fi people build valve amps also for audio, a lot of people appreciate the "warm sound" of valves, I wonder if something similar will happen also in photography, yesterday I noticed a new DSLR camera from Fuji that looked like a classic SLR of the 70s/80s like the Canon FTB or a Pentax, and it wasn't cheap, 1200 euros. Perhaps digital people are already fed up with plastic full frames and they would like to have something more old school. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted April 8, 2015 Share #251 Posted April 8, 2015 This is the reason -- M-A DR 50mm summicron ADOX CHS 100 II with an orange filter, at dusk, Mandeville Canyon fire road ..... (me and my youngest son) There are other places to post, and I do, but I think this makes the point . . . 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/223948-what-are-the-reasons-we-shoot-film-today/?do=findComment&comment=2794557'>More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted April 8, 2015 Share #252 Posted April 8, 2015 This is the reason -- M-A DR 50mm summicron ADOX CHS 100 II with an orange filter, at dusk, Mandeville Canyon fire road ..... (me and my youngest son) There are other places to post, and I do, but I think this makes the point . . . [ATTACH]492888[/ATTACH] So lovely. I'm sure digital could reproduce this. But you've got that negative you see. You can keep it in a shoebox or a bank's safe deposit box, or your wallet. For years, and it's still there. I use film not because I find value in some of my images, but because I hope my great-grand-children might. (Good thing you two get along; looks like he has some reach on you...) s-a Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted April 8, 2015 Share #253 Posted April 8, 2015 And this is a reason... A dear friend who took the time to travel back from her treatment for cancer to say goodbye to her friends...she passed away a month later. 10/2007, Leica M3 w/ 50mm collapsable Summicron, Tri-X. 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/223948-what-are-the-reasons-we-shoot-film-today/?do=findComment&comment=2794576'>More sharing options...
sblitz Posted April 8, 2015 Share #254 Posted April 8, 2015 What a terrible loss -- my heart goes out to you. And while I am not 100% sure digital would produce exactly the texture of your photo or mine, what S-A wrote about my shot, and yours as well, is I believe,100% correct -- the negative is forever and so too the print. No software changes or electromagnetic storms or some such event will lose them. Nothing is certain, I know, but the tactile and having in a shoe box! Have had the unfortunate luck to be at a few funerals, including my sweetheart's dad (91 yrs old). Sitting around the house and finding photos in boxes from WWii and later, can't ever imagine it being the same looking through an ipad ..... just sayin' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted April 8, 2015 Share #255 Posted April 8, 2015 ...Sitting around the house and finding photos in boxes from WWii and later, can't ever imagine it being the same looking through an ipad ..... just sayin' That's one reason I make prints of all my worthy photos….film or digital. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted April 8, 2015 Share #256 Posted April 8, 2015 That's one reason I make prints of all my worthy photos….film or digital. Jeff This is my reason. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/173623-im-already-tall-im-great.html And yes, made a lot of prints. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted April 8, 2015 Share #257 Posted April 8, 2015 Jeff -- Agree totally. Young woman in my office just gave birth to her first child and she was showing me all these iphone photos and being an old geezer I told to print some for the very same reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted April 9, 2015 Share #258 Posted April 9, 2015 I had not seen this series before, Paul. Really wonderful. br Philip This is my reason. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/173623-im-already-tall-im-great.html And yes, made a lot of prints. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted April 9, 2015 Share #259 Posted April 9, 2015 Thanks folks...Christine was one of those people who felt like a warm blanket to be around, she was part of a staff at the paper I worked at and it hit us hard. As for using film, I definitely subscribe to the notion of the darkroom print being the end goal. But...I have to confess to be increasingly concerned about it's viability, starting about three years ago.... I feel it is not digital or falling demand that will be the biggest threat to black and white film and the darkroom but the rapidly escalating global water shortage. I have been in contact with Ilford about this and they also take it very seriously. The topic is not talked about much but it is time to put it at the front of the line as in all likelihood, many regions will simply not support the idea of consuming so much water for the sake of "art". Film and RC prints can be dealt with in an efficient manner. But the far more desirable output of fiber based prints use a heap more to wash. Time to innovate on both ends before we get told what we can or can not do for the sake of art... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mijo Posted April 9, 2015 Share #260 Posted April 9, 2015 I feel the suppy of water may also be the down fall to film, particularly in California. The community darkroom that I belong to has all sorts of signage posted reminding members that our state is under drought conditions and to use the shortest wash times possible. Since this is a county run lab, I'm wondering if the Parks and Rec Dept. will shut down the traditional darkroom altogether and just leave the digital lab open. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.