abrewer Posted April 7, 2018 Share #1 Posted April 7, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Five Reasons Why I Am Never Going Back to Film Photography Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 7, 2018 Posted April 7, 2018 Hi abrewer, Take a look here Five Reasons. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Herr Barnack Posted April 7, 2018 Share #2 Posted April 7, 2018 Hmmmmm, I wonder where Resnick got the image of the M3 in his article? https://petapixel.com/2018/04/05/adorama-angers-film-photographers-with-article-and-stolen-photo/ 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richardgb Posted April 7, 2018 Share #3 Posted April 7, 2018 Having spent my formative photographic years in film and paper handling, processing, testing, and even taking photos, I would agree with everything Resnick says. This is not to say 'Don't shoot film!', and I still think it should be part of any photographic education: the discipline needed transferred to digital is invaluable. However, whether you shoot film or digital, do so because it gives you the image you want: photography has always meant this. Don't tear your hair out following one particular process (a less confusing term would be 'workflow') in the belief that it is inherently better or, for that matter, that you'll get Brownie points for doing so, when the results show otherwise. I still have a loaded Rolleiflex in the cupboard, just in case... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted April 7, 2018 Share #4 Posted April 7, 2018 Unless you really like darkrooms (I've spent enough time in them to satisfy my desires to be in them) then digital is a great boon. Could I go back - NO! But like Richard I do have a film camera (M4 loaded with Tri-X) just in case. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted April 7, 2018 Share #5 Posted April 7, 2018 It is way too obios... Reason one. Adorama is not selling enough film to make significant profit. Reason two. Adorama can't sell film cameras to make significant profit. Reason three. RR needs to make money somehow. Those are three real (it is all about money from sales) reasons why Adorama published Resnick's film bashing article, which was somewhat hot potato ten years ago. Adorama management knew from sales what where are some odd folks who are buying film from them. The purpose of this nothing new about trashing film copy&paste article is to convince those odd folks buying film at Adorama to get into digital. Because most likely, once you on digital, you'll, most likely, keep on buying and not 4-10$ rolls of film. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted April 7, 2018 Share #6 Posted April 7, 2018 (edited) It is way too obios... Reason one. Adorama is not selling enough film to make significant profit. Reason two. Adorama can't sell film cameras to make significant profit. Reason three. RR needs to make money somehow. Those are three real (it is all about money from sales) reasons why Adorama published Resnick's film bashing article, which was somewhat hot potato ten years ago. Adorama management knew from sales what where are some odd folks who are buying film from them. The purpose of this nothing new about trashing film copy&paste article is to convince those odd folks buying film at Adorama to get into digital. Because most likely, once you on digital, you'll, most likely, keep on buying and not 4-10$ rolls of film. So in a nutshell, Adorama's message is "If you shoot digital, buy film cameras and film from us; if you shoot film, buy digital cameras and memory cards from us. Whatever the case, just get on the treadmill and buy, buy, buy..." While we're at it, a pox and crab lice on their lackey writer for stealing Ken Rockwell's M3 image and removing his watermark from it. Undeniable theft of copyright protected imagery; I hope KR sues them over it. Edited April 7, 2018 by Herr Barnack 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted April 7, 2018 Share #7 Posted April 7, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) So in a nutshell, Adorama's message is "If you shoot digital, buy film cameras and film from us; if you shoot film, buy digital cameras and memory cards from us. Whatever the case, just get on the treadmill and buy, buy, buy..." While we're at it, a pox and crab lice on their lackey writer for stealing Ken Rockwell's M3 image and removing his watermark from it. Undeniable theft of copyright protected imagery; I hope KR sues them over it. I just dig it. How could he became to be a total buffon not only stealing one of well known image, but trying to deny the obvious. What a tool... 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted April 12, 2018 Share #8 Posted April 12, 2018 (edited) Haha this made me laugh. Boycott Adorama, I say. What a bunch of effing clowns. It is incomprehensible why any retailer ever would want to alienate any of its customers. I personally don't care a rat's rear why anyone shoots whatever it is they shoot. It seems the OP ought to have posted the link in the digital forum, though. Seems Adorama may have removed other content by Resnick. https://www.adorama.com/alc/article_author/mason-resnick And it seems Resnick was the author not long ago on an article about image theft. It's now gone. Not even archive.org has it. 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! Edited April 12, 2018 by philipus 3 Quote 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/283462-five-reasons/?do=findComment&comment=3499147'>More sharing options...
leica dream Posted April 13, 2018 Share #9 Posted April 13, 2018 I believe there is a place for both film and digital which is why I invested in a secondhand R6.2 recently. In fact, my local "photographic" Society had a back to basics session last week about digital and as the sole film shooter there I realised just how much more complex digital is than film just because of all the software in the camera and later which tries to mimic film. OK, yes, at point of shoot it may be faster, easier, certainly cheaper per shot and very flexible, but afterwards there is all the post processing workflow. I have found it quite difficult going back to film after 15 years of digital (previously I did my own wet processing and print/enlarging) because film puts the SKILL of photography right back at the point of shooting. One cannot switch ISO mid shoot, or check images instantly, or get the camera to auto focus, so the entire shot skill is in the hands of the photographer but one does get a permanent full frame image every time. Indeed, I came away from the meeting realising that the Society is really an "imaging" group rather than a "photographic" group. This was backed up by the Secretary insisting that he check with higher level groups that images captured on film were allowable in regional competitions. I shall carry both my R6.2 and my digital C together from now on. The C for quick and spontaneous shots, or maybe where I need higher ISO (I have no analogue flash), or when I need zoom greater than my 50mm F2. Richard Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 13, 2018 Share #10 Posted April 13, 2018 [...] I came away from the meeting realising that the Society is really an "imaging" group rather than a "photographic" group. This was backed up by the Secretary insisting that he check with higher level groups that images captured on film were allowable in regional competitions. [...] Taken at face value, that concept is certainly f*cked up. 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted April 14, 2018 Share #11 Posted April 14, 2018 Indeed, I came away from the meeting realising that the Society is really an "imaging" group rather than a "photographic" group. This was backed up by the Secretary insisting that he check with higher level groups that images captured on film were allowable in regional competitions. Richard But photographic (film) pictures are a subset of "imaging", and digital is, if not pressed too hard, a subset of "writing with light"; photography. There is no real distinction; it's just nonsense. Perhaps the Secretary (...He polished up the handle of the big front door...) and his higher levels are afraid a subversive film hand will create better images of local cats than those generally displayed. Hopes here that the pompous frauds let you in, Richard, with your dark art, and that you astonish them at will with your pic tures. Unless you don't care to. I've said this here before, the best photography is a loner's quest. If you're seeing what everyone else is seeing you're seeing nothing at all. Whether it's "good" or not is not the reason for the search, nor its reward. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stray cat Posted April 14, 2018 Share #12 Posted April 14, 2018 Resnick’s stated reasons for never going back to film are: (1) “digital costs less than film,” (2) “digital is faster,” (3) “digital is healthier,” (4) “digital is more flexible,” and (5) “I can make beautiful prints from my digital files.” Wow. Just wow. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted April 22, 2018 Share #13 Posted April 22, 2018 Japan Camera Hunter offers their view on this dustup: https://www.japancamerahunter.com/2018/04/film-news-adorama-scores-hat-trick-blunders/ 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrewer Posted April 23, 2018 Author Share #14 Posted April 23, 2018 Japan Camera Hunter offers their view on this dustup: https://www.japancamerahunter.com/2018/04/film-news-adorama-scores-hat-trick-blunders/ Michael's always even-handed with his reviews and his critiques . . . pretty much nails this one IMO Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 23, 2018 Share #15 Posted April 23, 2018 It is time to revive my memories being one those 'new guys using miniature cameras' for daily newspaper photography. "How many columns will fit 1 1/2' " ? A good beginning. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted April 23, 2018 Share #16 Posted April 23, 2018 Michael's always even-handed with his reviews and his critiques . . . pretty much nails this one IMO Agreed - Resnick certainly didn't do Adorama any favors. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonescapes Posted April 24, 2018 Share #17 Posted April 24, 2018 (edited) 1. Darkroom practice will die a lot younger than film photography. People will still want to shoot film/use film cameras, so there will always kitchen-sink processing, a handful of big labs, home negative scanners, and the same handful of labs doing drum scans. But very few people are going to be interested in learning darkroom practice or maintaining their own darkroom. 2. If Resnick thinks that digital is environmentally-friendly, he's nuts. He should go check out some of the places that harvest the raw materials to produce digital cameras. Combine their practices with digital rot/planned obsolescence, and I think it's really in the eye of the beholder whether the net effect on human health is any better with digital. Lots of stuff that gets put into/onto digital camera innards during construction is plenty carcinogenic, too. Edited April 24, 2018 by Lonescapes 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 24, 2018 Share #18 Posted April 24, 2018 2. If Resnick thinks that digital is environmentally-friendly, he's nuts. It is not in his backyard (NIMBY). Elitist bastard. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted April 24, 2018 Share #19 Posted April 24, 2018 1. Like an intellectual fractal the digital vs. film debate is a border of infinite length enclosing a finite space. 2. Stealing electronic content is not "digital's" crime but its culture, and it didn't start yesterday. 3. Journalism has become lazy and shallow, apparently with an ample list of reasons why it must be so. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambro51 Posted April 24, 2018 Share #20 Posted April 24, 2018 Revivals DO happen. It is a FACT that there are more practicing Daguerreotypists in New York City today than there were in 1870. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.