A film 'look' in the near future?

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Steven said:

 

It's ok to be nostalgic, but it's also good to give in to the time we live in and embrace it. If you don't believe me, watch Midnight in Paris again. 

So is a brushstroke on a canvas nostalgic just because brushes and paint have been around for a few years? 

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[willeica]

27 minutes ago, Steven said:

I think you might have missed my point. I am saying that the digital generation is going through an urge to make their photos like film out of nostalgia for the film look. I'm not saying that everyone who likes film is a nostalgic. 

Where I live, a lot of 'digital natives' are using film rather than looking for a 'film look' from digital cameras. There is a lot happening outside of the 'digital bubble'. 

Check out the following:

https://camerarescue.org

https://emulsive.org

https://www.35mmc.com

https://www.japancamerahunter.com

The main stayers for digital are older users and, strangely enough, people in the US. In Europe and elsewhere the trend is well underway. Leica AG is very conscious of this, but has not yet fully decided how to address it. There have been rumours of a cheaper Leica film camera. My view is that the company should look at establishing an operation like Camera Rescue for all of the many unused and unrepaired old Leica film cameras lying around the world.

Time will tell.

William 

 

Edited May 27, 2021 by willeica

[a.noctilux]

William, very nice suggestion for Leica to repair old Leica film M ( I'd add 'at reasonable cost' if possible).

I have some Leica to be repaired but let them unused ( a pity ! ) not sellable for use as such and unrepaired ( for me, not so economically or practically good 'operation' ).

I'd do the operations ( + repairs even if I lost some reasonable amount of money so these can be used again).

[250swb]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

I think you might have missed my point. I am saying that the digital generation is going through an urge to make their photos like film out of nostalgia for the film look. I'm not saying that everyone who likes film is a nostalgic. 

I'm not sure you get the point either. How can somebody have nostalgia for film or the look of film who has never used film? It isn't about film.

The younger generation are using the language of photography, the visual language that communicates different things if an image is grainy from one that is clinical, one is B&W, or one is colour. If in this thread people used a similar approach they would understand that using grain (for example) isn't because it reminds everybody of Robert Cappa on 'D Day', but the messages and emotions that stark grainy images conjure up. Having learnt that if now they want to impart a sense of drama they can use the same language of grainy B&W, not because of nostalgia, but because they want to say something to somebody other than their own reflection.

Unfortunately this thread has descended to the lowest common denominator, that something should look like it looks and shouldn't be anything else unless an excuse can be found, nostalgia being a possibility maybe? It's funny how photographers can so easily throw out the language of photography while people who know nothing can recognise visual messages, albeit subliminally, in advertising, movies, or photographic exhibitions. You can spend all your entire damned life understanding the world around you and only photographers can come up with gagging orders to communication such as 'I don't do post processing and like to make the image as good as possible in the camera', or 'a Leica M isn't meant to be used on a tripod', or 'it's a digital image so I don't like to add grain'. Good grief.

[evikne]

I guess there are many reasons why people use film emulations, but to me, it is not because I want to imitate any particular film. If that were the case, I guess I had just fooled myself. Instead I simply try to find a look that appeals to me. 

Edited May 27, 2021 by evikne

[pgk]

19 minutes ago, 250swb said:

Good grief.

There are no 'rules' as such, but there are lots of influences.

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Forget the film look, digital canera should emulate oil painting!Make it look like Monet, or Van

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!

Nay, just kidding!

Edited May 27, 2021 by Einst_Stein

[plasticman]

2 hours ago, willeica said:

Where I live, a lot of 'digital natives' are using film rather than looking for a 'film look' from digital cameras. There is a lot happening outside of the 'digital bubble'. 

Exactly this William. Before the pandemic I was teaching a course at one of Stockholm's most 'hipster' colleges* every Fall, and the students fell into two camps: those with a phone-cam or those with a film-cam. I was always amazed at how many of the latter there were every year.

Incidentally this is one of the interesting things about sites like TheOnlinePhotographer. I enjoy Mike Johnston and his thoughtful posts, but very often he betrays the fact that he (and a lot of his readership) belong to the old-guard of photography: older men who left behind a long history of using film, (and even developing and printing it in the darkroom), and think that only a dwindling band of old diehards are sticking with it. I guess living out in the countryside he doesn't get to see so many young people out with their Hasselblad 501's.

*PS: the course was totally not photography-related and even though I light-heartedly refer to the place as hipster, it's a really great institution with amazing students.

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, Steven said:

I do shoot film too, and I encourage people to do. But some digital natives try to look for an easy way for their files to look like film. I say that as of Thursday 27 May 2021, it's just not possible. They will always feel different. 

I advocate that the only way to get the film look is to shoot film. Same for  motion pictures, by the way. 

Nice links, thanks for sharing. 

We’ve discussed at length, but until one looks at print results from both (or hybrid) approaches, one doesn’t really do justice for evaluation IMO.   I have many wonderful prints, silver and inkjet, in multiple styles, from others and my own, and I enjoy each in their own right. Comparisons don’t matter; the work either resonates or not.

I’ve seen Midnight in Paris multiple times.

Jeff

[pgk]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

Comparisons don’t matter; the work either resonates or not.

Whe I ran a gallery we sold silver based and inkjet prints. The content was what mattered.

[plasticman]

55 minutes ago, Steven said:

Have you hear of instagram filters? It's a pretty dark world. As an anecdote, a friend of mind create in less than 10 minutes an instagram filters. In 2 months only, it was used 2,4 billion times. young people like filters.  

Back in 2013 one of my best friends created a website called filter-fakers which crawled Instagram and auto-posted images that had been tagged by the user with the #nofilter tag (pretending to be an unfiltered image) and then listing which filters had actually been used (from the metadata). It was pretty hilarious. It stopped working about 5 years ago I think - when insta blocked that type of scraping. 
 

My impression is that kids using film cameras genuinely want a tactile, authentic, real experience when they use film, which is so different to their otherwise digital existence. 

[adan]

2 hours ago, Steven said:

I am referring to a concept proposed by Woody Allen in his film midnight in Paris, where he discuss a deep form of nostalgia that young people feel for a time they did not get to know, but just heard of, then imagined.

Call it "nostalgia-by-proxy."

And given that 52% of the world population is under 30 (in the US, 50% under 40) - it may be the most common form of nostalgia.

Personally, I try to live in the present, and for the future, and let the past bury its dead in peace. (But that's another story....)

[ianman]

7 minutes ago, Steven said:

My impression is that Parisian kids want to bring a contax T2 to home parties cause it looks vintage

Pretty superficial motivation. How long will the fad last?

[ianman]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

before the plastic compact film camera

Do you mean the single use ones? They are not very eco friendly but surprisingly good. A couple of years ago an acquaintance bought a bunch of them and made some superb shots.

[Guest]

On 5/26/2021 at 9:49 PM, adan said:

…I did eventually return to film in medium-format, because they don't make 56mm x 56mm sensors for general use…

Hi Andy! What was the reason, that made you change your work-flow substantially? What strong effect did 56x56 provide, that you could not achieve with 24x36?

Best,

Simon

 

[Einst_Stein]

1 hour ago, tri said:

Hi Andy! What was the reason, that made you change your work-flow substantially? What strong effect did 56x56 provide, that you could not achieve with 24x36?

Best,

Simon

 

The 56x56 or Hasselblad 54x54 square format does have a special emotional appealing. Among them the Hasselblad 38mm SWC is at the top. The Fuji GX680 is another monster. Its PC capability is hard to resist. I still keep mine. 

I shoot film on HB SWC not really for the film, but just so that I can use the camera. I shoot both 35mm films to get the panoramic 24x54 and 120 for 54x54.  I also keep the GX680 monster in my car trunk to be ready when the call hits me. 

Of course I can use the HB 49x37 digital back, but it just doesn't get the same fun as shooting film, a major part of the fun is in the darkroom.

Sometimes I also carry the Roller 35S or Kodak Retina IIIC with me. 

All for he sake so that I can use the camera. 

What? the special superior film look? have't noticed yet.  (yes, it's different, that's all).

[adan]

Hi, Simon!

Mostly - to (re)explore the square format "authentically." Sort of like the folks here who say "if you want the film look, shoot film."

I could have shot 24x36 digital and cropped it, but I preferred to just pursue square pictures (including "natural" black borders) with a camera designed make squares in the first place.

It was more of an "added workflow" than a changed workflow. I kept right on shooting the M10 as well. As we say in American baseball, I just wanted a "changeup" pitch in my arsenal.

As my first magazine issue on this page ("You Go, Grrrl!") shows: a B&W essay with the reflex Hasselblad (and 40mm and 120mm lenses), then a color essay with the M10, and then a B&W companion to the M10 color essay with a 6x6 Agfa Super-Isolette folding RF (75mm lens):

http://www.coloradoseen.com/2017/

Sadly, the Agfa developed a terminal disease of the film advance a few months after that essay, and my back began complaining about carrying the Hassy SLR and lenses. But then I lucked into a complete kit of a Mamiya 6 rangefinder with 50/75/150 lenses, plus a Hassy Super-Wide (38mm Biogon), which solved both those problems.

And combined to produce this multi-year project:

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 May 28, 2021 by adan

[250swb]

15 hours ago, Steven said:

I am referring to a concept proposed by Woody Allen in his film midnight in Paris, where he discuss a deep form of nostalgia that young people feel for a time they did not get to know, but just heard of, then imagined. I liked the idea and saw a similar pattern with younger photographers on instagram that suddenly all became obsessed with the grain slider in LR.

 

They probably realised that grain gives the eye something to latch onto, something that can fill a void or create mood. Using a term like nostalgia is loaded always towards 'nice'. If somebody had read about living as a serf in the medieval period, become an expert, and filled their life with the history it's hard for me to imagine that even then they'd have 'nostalgia' for it.

nostalgia

noun

 

1. a sentimental longing or wistful affection for a period in the past

    

To which I bring you back to your point about grain being nostalgic and ask, which is the most nostalgic gritty war photograph you've seen? You see it doesn't work, nostalgia simply describes a romantic ideal whereas using grain can become part of the visual language for any type of image, from romantic to frightening.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Charles Morgan]

3 minutes ago, 250swb said:

 

nostalgia

noun

 

1. a sentimental longing or wistful affection for a period in the past

    

 

2 years ago, I visited the Leica Park in Wetzlar. There was an exhibition of work by Dr Paul Worth and Alfred Tritschler from the 30s and 40s. Commercial photographers, they produced images of the Berlin Olympics, German Railways, the Hindenburg and numerous other works using mostly Leicas. The stress, time and time again, was upon how much they strove to reduce grain to as little as possible - commercial printing required as solid an image as possible. Expose long, develop short. What struck me time and again was that their negatives on display were close to perfect, and their prints ditto. In other words, they understood the medium of 35mm needed greater care than medium format to produce clear, sharp and low grain images, and they were masters of all stages of the process.

The grain I see too much of today (definitely including in my own images) results from scanner light scatter and also underexposed shadows. Add in the common dust spots from a negative and what I too often see is nostalgia for a past that would have absolutely hated such things. People could not afford to be so slapdash.

 

 

 

[analog-digital]

Am 25.5.2021 um 12:24 schrieb colint544:

The film versus digital debate has been done to death. But I'm curious if we'll reach a point where digital files will be indistinguishable from, say, the look of Kodak Portra.

 

A CCD sensor is very near to film.......

Edited May 28, 2021 by analog-digital