Doc Henry Posted January 17, 2017 Share #121 Posted January 17, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am going to attend one of the marches planned for this Saturday here in the States. I had planned on bringing my T, but now the forecast calls for some rain, so instead it will be the M4, a 35mm and Tri-X. No electronics to get wet. So in this case, advantage goes to film! Good demonstration . The M4 supports obviously rain it's more solid than T and you are right TX is a good choice. Please post pictures in our thread http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/page-1316?do=findComment&comment=3188301 Thanks Henry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Hi Doc Henry, Take a look here Are there any benefits of using film compared to digital. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
tom0511 Posted January 17, 2017 Share #122 Posted January 17, 2017 I have been thinking about going back to film several times. Here is my take:I would love to go back to film for the image taking process, but I have not much experience in making print/darkroom. So I feel the big advantage of digital is that I do more prints and more important better quality prints. To be able to do this with film I would have to a) either learn more about darkroom and do analog prints (sounds like fun but I am not sure I have the time and patience) scan and print digital (scanned files are huge to store, scanning is boaring, and the whole process is only "half analog", so I dont feel its the real analog feel c) go to a good lab and not do prints myself (maybe the best option, but expensive and probably woud also lead to less prints) Another reasons against analog is you need more room and effort for achieving things. I am still tempted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted January 17, 2017 Share #123 Posted January 17, 2017 Tom it's two different ways , one with his PC, software and inkjet printer (some hours of work in front his PC) and one with development (color or b&w) + scan negative if you need to post in forum or send to your family ... or print by inkjet by external lab. but IMO print has not the same process a simple deposit of ink on paper. You can have enlarger to print your favorite photos and there what a great pleasure to do the job yourself (instead of being in front of his computer) , at every moment of the day or the week-end (ext lab is closed) I add that the print on silver paper , like Ilford in b&w , is nicer , you can frame and hang your picture on the wall after. Henry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
105012 Posted January 18, 2017 Share #124 Posted January 18, 2017 Hi Tom, I have gone and built a full analog setup with darkroom. It has been a rewarding (and fun) experience with good results on silver halide paper for me. A lot of quality darkroom equipment is available at low cost. I also have an analog to digital desk with three different scanners for different purposes, I use this to get a quick contact sheet and also for sharing online. I like to make pictures without a computer or automation, more human and it means that I am not sitting down at a computer again after using one in my professional life. Instead the quiet of my darkroom, making something real by hand. Just one data point Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted January 18, 2017 Share #125 Posted January 18, 2017 Hi Tom, I have gone and built a full analog setup with darkroom. It has been a rewarding (and fun) experience with good results on silver halide paper for me. A lot of quality darkroom equipment is available at low cost. I also have an analog to digital desk with three different scanners for different purposes, I use this to get a quick contact sheet and also for sharing online. I like to make pictures without a computer or automation, more human and it means that I am not sitting down at a computer again after using one in my professional life. Instead the quiet of my darkroom, making something real by hand. Just one data point Exactly and the result is better , you can do anything in your darkroom , to make your photo nicer in example by cropping . A picture "with a soul" , more human , not artificial made by a camera robot entirely electronic (electric signals through square pixels of sensor) Best Henry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pharyngula Posted January 18, 2017 Share #126 Posted January 18, 2017 Interesting thread and I agree with much of what has been said. I've been thinking of picking up an M7 with the primary goal of shooting slide film, especially now that Ektachrome appears to be coming back. Something about archiving and looking at slides on a light box with a loupe that has always appealed to me far more than digital image file management, post processing and hard drive back-ups. I'd love to have an analog darkroom once again but it just isn't in cards for me - at least for "now". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 18, 2017 Share #127 Posted January 18, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) What are the pros and cons that I should seriously consider before hitting the buy key? In all honesty its not about pros and cons. Digital and film are totally different ways of creating images. Neither is 'better' than the other and the way they achieve results is now almost incomparable. Shooting film is just like shooting digital except for the mechanics of loading and winding on. From then on everything diverges. You can take various routes through to the final image from a purely chemical one to a hybrid scanned one. Processing and printing the 'traditional' way requires a lot of 'hands on' operations, and knowledge which has to be largely acquired through practice. My only real comment is that you need to be prepared for what you are letting yourself in for. It can be relatively simple and easy - get someone else to process and scan the films for you. Or terribly time consuming and all embracing, but satisfying. I'm nearly done with darkrooms myself now - far too many hours in them working to deadlines to find them exciting to be in sadly. Others find them very pleasurable indeed - to some film shooting is wondrous and they love darkrooms and processing I do have the odd film camera which I occasionally use, but only for the sake of taking photos with an old, precision Leica M which is still pleasurable in itself, and I don't now process myself, although a fellow forum member gave me an enlarger which I will one day set it up, even if only to show others who have never experienced it, the magic of watching an image appear in front of your eyes in the developing bath - this should be on any photographer's 'to do' list if they haven't seen it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Posted January 18, 2017 Share #128 Posted January 18, 2017 Now that I have a larger number of developed rolls under my belt, I find that developing a roll of B&W film is a relaxing process. It is certainly more relaxing that firing up Lightroom and working within. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that sitting at computer and keyboard is so much a part of my daily work routine that anytime I am at the computer, work related anxiety creeps in. I don't know, but standing in the kitchen processing a roll of film is about as far away from the digital world I seem to be able to wander these days. Film photography= relaxing hobby. Digital photography= hobby incorporating reminders of work activity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aesop Posted January 19, 2017 Share #129 Posted January 19, 2017 ...film is great but, for me, the big win here is still the battery-free operation of my Leica film cameras. Imagine having the ability to operate a camera without any worries about power. My gee-whizz iPhone is a constant reminder of just how debilitating the reliance on power can be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted January 19, 2017 Share #130 Posted January 19, 2017 Aesop , I agree , no battery , no camera , no EVFeither and no photos . It's as simple as that ! In opposition , in example M-A or M3 or M2 doesn't need battery ! Rg H Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted January 19, 2017 Share #131 Posted January 19, 2017 Aesop , I agree , no battery , no camera , no EVFeither and no photos . It's as simple as that ! In opposition , in example M-A or M3 or M2 doesn't need battery ! Rg H Don't forget the M4 -- the best M in my opinion or the updated "version" the MA (different rewind crank, brighter viewfinder, 75mm frame lines). Have both, love both, never worry about taking them out in cold weather or snow or rain. And as much as I enjoy the shots from my Q, and they are far superior to the M9 I had before, I still fiddle with them a lot more than the scanned film shots -- a lot more. As I have written before, if I was shooting under a deadline for publication, it would be digital without question. I am not, so I don't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaybob Posted January 19, 2017 Share #132 Posted January 19, 2017 The electronic viewfinder experience I've had, both on the Sony (nex 6) and Panasonic (lx-7) cameras I use, is not aging particularly well with me. They are probably contributing to some of the vision problems I've begun to experience as someone who just turned 50, mostly reading things at arms length and the need for reading glasses for that distance. Maybe it's not super smart to hold that mini TV less than 3mm from your eye surface. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted January 19, 2017 Share #133 Posted January 19, 2017 Don't forget the M4 -- the best M in my opinion or the updated "version" the MA (different rewind crank, brighter viewfinder, 75mm frame lines). Have both, love both, never worry about taking them out in cold weather or snow or rain. And as much as I enjoy the shots from my Q, and they are far superior to the M9 I had before, I still fiddle with them a lot more than the scanned film shots -- a lot more. As I have written before, if I was shooting under a deadline for publication, it would be digital without question. I am not, so I don't. Yes Steve + M4. Thank you for this reminder The electronic viewfinder experience I've had, both on the Sony (nex 6) and Panasonic (lx-7) cameras I use, is not aging particularly well with me. They are probably contributing to some of the vision problems I've begun to experience as someone who just turned 50, mostly reading things at arms length and the need for reading glasses for that distance. Maybe it's not super smart to hold that mini TV less than 3mm from your eye surface. Jay, accommodation is done in a small space for EVF as you watch the image on a small LCD screen it is possible , must be careful ! H. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ricoh Posted January 19, 2017 Author Share #134 Posted January 19, 2017 You film camera users must be smiling inwardly with content if you're keeping up with the discussion on the M10 release, and whether to ditch the M240 in favour of the new M10. Once a film user, upgrade is not normally of concern, unless it's for reasons such as acquiring a camera with a built in light meter, or for cosmetic matters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted January 19, 2017 Share #135 Posted January 19, 2017 Yes Steve it heats on the M10 thread So much better for Leica that continue to have digital fans.....like that Leica will always exist ... to make us more analog cameras like the M-A * The only brand in the world that continues to produce analog M. In any case the M4 has much inspired the M10 in dimension Best Henry * + MP and M7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemgb Posted January 19, 2017 Share #136 Posted January 19, 2017 You film camera users must be smiling inwardly with content if you're keeping up with the discussion on the M10 release, and whether to ditch the M240 in favour of the new M10. Once a film user, upgrade is not normally of concern, unless it's for reasons such as acquiring a camera with a built in light meter, or for cosmetic matters. Back in the days when film was all there was I did go through that upgrade cycle, cameras with better light meters, faster motorwinds, more operating modes, etc. Now I'm back to film I have about 12 cameras I shoot with regularly, only three have light meters, only one has a program mode, aperture priority in this case. However, I do like the look of the M10, I have found I much prefer simplicity and the M10 seems to be about as simple as you can get. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShivaYash Posted February 4, 2017 Share #137 Posted February 4, 2017 I think film bodies are picking up in price. Last year, in the UK, I saw several working M6s go for as low as £600. I paid just over £700 for a mint chrome M6... get one before they increase more I say. There is great flexibility in having a digital and film body within the same system. I shoot around 50-60 rolls per year, it brings me great joy and pleasure. Of course I shoot a good amount of digital too. Its just nice to mix it regarding medium, and making the best use of the sweet M glass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted February 5, 2017 Share #138 Posted February 5, 2017 Each market is different. Where I'm M film bodies are going down in price. Here is one or two Leica trained technicians left to do service locally. Again, I can't say anything about UK, but where I'm my film Leica will give me ten years of bw film at 70 rolls (2K+) per year for the price of half on M10. With DIY developing and scanning included, plus CLA every five years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted February 5, 2017 Share #139 Posted February 5, 2017 Not on 135mm film in my view. Scanning is cumbersome. The real benefits of B&W silver film can only come forward in the dark room in my view, when you print on Baryta paper. THE greatest loss in analogue photographie is the paperprint IMO and especally on Agfa's Record Rapid and Portriga Rapid. Inkjet printing on modern Baryta inkjet papers does not give that sensation of depth in images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulJenkin Posted February 13, 2017 Share #140 Posted February 13, 2017 Having shot film since 1973/4, I miss having a darkroom. However, although I like using my "Q", I still prefer the "look" of film and using my MP. A bit of judicious scanning on my Epson &50Pro (okay, it's not perfect for 35mm but it's fine for what I need) and I can get a print that looks respectable. I have a friend who runs a camera shop and can do chemical prints for me if I want him to. I've used a hybrid approach for a number of years and I suspect that many film users do likewise. So long as we can get film, I'll be a happy bunny! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.