The Zen of Film vs. Digital Gratification [Archive] - Digital Photographer Philippines

MikeDougan

01-21-2007, 06:24 PM

A quote from Nobuyoshi Araki on film vs digital

Humidity and darkness are very important elements in photography, so you have to be careful with digital cameras because they sort of kill those elements, I say. I, too, use them, sort of recording things in everyday life for fun, though.

Photography needs to be sentimental. That dry brightness that digital cameras create, that’s not sentimental at all. Colors created with the three primary colors have a very simple impact, but there’s a melancholy at the same time. Colors don’t turn out the way you want them to be, that’s what so good about them.

from this article Filmwasters (http://filmwasters.com/blog/archives/29)

Mike

nino_carandang

01-22-2007, 10:59 AM

I ran into Roger Hicks and Frances Schultz a few months ago in Beijing at a café. We had a couple of beers and looked at each other’s cameras. At one point we were talking about digital and talked about how we all had and used them, but just couldn’t do great things with them. At one point, he looked down and said something that stuck with me:

“Soulless things, aren’t they?” I couldn’t agree more.

- Jim O'Connell from the filmwasters.com website.

// that's how I actually feel about MY digital photography, "soulless". Hence the desire to shoot BW film to revive what "soul" was actually left in the first place. I feel my humanity and soul died when digital came into the picture.

I learned photography using a digital camera. I learned quickly and easily without any hassle. This was due to the easy feedback that digital cameras gave. This cheap and fast feedback of digital cameras cannot never be matched by film. I feel that the same instantaneous feedback has robbed me of the excitement that I have now when having my film developed.

Regarding Nobuyoshi Araki's "dry brightness", I couldn't agree more. Whenever I compare my film shots and digital shots, I couldn't help but love my film shots more even if they were of the same subject. I cannot explain why this personal phenomenon always occurs. I believe that the "dry brightness" Araki was talking about was the same "absence of soul" that Jim was referring to.

I will quote from a photoblog post made by a certain Vicki: "The beauty of film lies in its imperfections, whereas digital strives for a perfect 'everything in focus' flat image, which is soulless, banal and unpleasant on the eye. Digital is made for lazy, post production manipulation - there is no responsibilty or urgency on the photographer to capture the right image there and then, because it can too easily be altered in Photoshop. Digital indulges the tekkie - there is lots of boring talk of DPI's and mega pixels and compression rates and formats - ultimately an obsession with process over content."

// (in the back of my mind, this is how most photographers think, just keep on shooting, Photoshop can save the image anyway. Frank Hoefsmit was right, we need to perfect the image so we don't have to Photoshop it. I just wish this is how everyone thinks.

On the other side, Max Ferguson counters the idea of digital being soulless by saying "Digital isn't soulless. That comes from you, no matter what tools you're using. You've still got to have a good idea, you still have to light it you still have to make it work."

A recent chat with Allan Razo and Julius Clar enlightened me to the humanity behind film photography. They even expanded the discussion to "the connection between photographer and film during developing". I have no experience at all in developing film, but I do want to try it to feel this "connection" that Allan and Julius was talking about. I do however feel the connection between my film prints more than my digital prints.

Whether it is or it isn't soulless, I guess is left in the hands of the photographer.

nino_carandang

01-22-2007, 11:14 AM

I found this in another photoblog of a Holga 120N shooter.

"Film is for the thinking photographer, the one who actually thinks before he shoots so as not to waste the shot. He's the perfectionist. Digital is for the boring. The technologically advanced shooter but creatively challenged. It is for the photographer who just keeps on clicking away, believing that he can compose and create magic during post production."

// I don't totally agree with what this person said. Although he does have a few valid points. For most of us, we can be a thinking photographer that can create magic during post production. Shooting film or digital doesn't immediately classify us to be either a thinking photographer or a snap-happy shooter. The perfect combination I believe is a photographer (whether digital or film) that can think first before he shoots, compose creatively and can do wonders in Photoshop.

Pilar Tuason

01-22-2007, 02:57 PM

I will quote from a photoblog post made by a certain Vicki: "The beauty of film lies in its imperfections, whereas digital strives for a perfect 'everything in focus' flat image, which is soulless, banal and unpleasant on the eye. Digital is made for lazy, post production manipulation - there is no responsibilty or urgency on the photographer to capture the right image there and then, because it can too easily be altered in Photoshop. Digital indulges the tekkie - there is lots of boring talk of DPI's and mega pixels and compression rates and formats - ultimately an obsession with process over content."

I can relate to this. I do feel that the "imperfections" or "accidents" that are captured in film is what makes the images unique, even the grain is beautiful where in digital, everything is expected to be tack sharp and perfectly exposed and noise free otherwise, it's just "not quite right"....

Melvin Vivas

01-23-2007, 01:44 PM

Well said Nino.

I ran into Roger Hicks and Frances Schultz a few months ago in Beijing at a café. We had a couple of beers and looked at each other’s cameras. At one point we were talking about digital and talked about how we all had and used them, but just couldn’t do great things with them. At one point, he looked down and said something that stuck with me:

“Soulless things, aren’t they?” I couldn’t agree more.

- Jim O'Connell from the filmwasters.com website.

// that's how I actually feel about MY digital photography, "soulless". Hence the desire to shoot BW film to revive what "soul" was actually left in the first place. I feel my humanity and soul died when digital came into the picture.

I learned photography using a digital camera. I learned quickly and easily without any hassle. This was due to the easy feedback that digital cameras gave. This cheap and fast feedback of digital cameras cannot never be matched by film. I feel that the same instantaneous feedback has robbed me of the excitement that I have now when having my film developed.

Regarding Nobuyoshi Araki's "dry brightness", I couldn't agree more. Whenever I compare my film shots and digital shots, I couldn't help but love my film shots more even if they were of the same subject. I cannot explain why this personal phenomenon always occurs. I believe that the "dry brightness" Araki was talking about was the same "absence of soul" that Jim was referring to.

I will quote from a photoblog post made by a certain Vicki: "The beauty of film lies in its imperfections, whereas digital strives for a perfect 'everything in focus' flat image, which is soulless, banal and unpleasant on the eye. Digital is made for lazy, post production manipulation - there is no responsibilty or urgency on the photographer to capture the right image there and then, because it can too easily be altered in Photoshop. Digital indulges the tekkie - there is lots of boring talk of DPI's and mega pixels and compression rates and formats - ultimately an obsession with process over content."

// (in the back of my mind, this is how most photographers think, just keep on shooting, Photoshop can save the image anyway. Frank Hoefsmit was right, we need to perfect the image so we don't have to Photoshop it. I just wish this is how everyone thinks.

On the other side, Max Ferguson counters the idea of digital being soulless by saying "Digital isn't soulless. That comes from you, no matter what tools you're using. You've still got to have a good idea, you still have to light it you still have to make it work."

A recent chat with Allan Razo and Julius Clar enlightened me to the humanity behind film photography. They even expanded the discussion to "the connection between photographer and film during developing". I have no experience at all in developing film, but I do want to try it to feel this "connection" that Allan and Julius was talking about. I do however feel the connection between my film prints more than my digital prints.

Whether it is or it isn't soulless, I guess is left in the hands of the photographer.

MikeDougan

01-23-2007, 08:07 PM

This is exactly how I feel, nail the image, get it spot on and do no digital manipulation, other than the conversion/cleanup/sharpening (basically developing).

Since starting to shoot film I find my digital photography has improved. I shoot less but get a higher keeper rate.

Images shot on film has an organic quality that digital just dose'nt deliver.

Mike

MikeDougan

01-23-2007, 08:11 PM

Derick_Gamboa

01-23-2007, 08:18 PM

MikeDougan

01-24-2007, 01:40 AM

I have to admit I have grown extremely tired of over processed, over sharpened un-natural digital images.

A good photographer should get it right, in camera and then all you have to do is "develop" the digital image for your desired output medium.

Mike

riapangilinan

03-08-2007, 12:15 PM

I heard my friend say that film cameras produces better images than digital cameras.. is there a basis to this? what is their justification?

just wondering.. :Grin:

dave_deluria

03-08-2007, 12:20 PM

Then good luck to him.

Film and Digital are just different ways of capturing images. There's more than one way to tie your shoes too but in the end as long as they don't become undone, then it achieves it's purpose.

I have my own views, but I don't like to generalize in a forum because it's always a double edged sword and will end up in another post padding exercise in futility.

However, if you ask what aspects of film makes it unique from digital, then I think it's a better discussion.

MikeDougan

03-08-2007, 01:06 PM

My 2 cents for what its worth............

35mm film can produce better dynamic range than a good digital camera (even a 1Ds mk2) however in terms of resolution/colour there is very little difference and for me digital wins just because it is more convenient. (D200/5D etc and upwards)

However when you compare these digital cameras, even a 1Ds mk2 to medium format film the winner is glaringly obvious. 120 film has so much more detail, better dynamic range, better colour etc.....

Unfortunately for me to discover this I spent lots of money on my digital kit which no lies unused. I prefer to use the growing collection of old manual cameras I have than to carry my 5D.

Want to find out for yourself, buy a second hand TLR (Yashicamat or Seagull) and borrow a light meter. You will be very surprised with your results.

Mike

Gil Penaflorida

03-08-2007, 02:41 PM

I still shoot film both 35 and 120 and likewise have the D200. There are certain situations where film excels like when you have a high contrast scene, film's wider dynamic range may allow you to expose for the shadows and still get reasonably good highlights. With digital you are almost sure that highlights will be blown out if there is at least 2-3 stop difference much like slide film. 120 film drum scanned high resolution will give the 1Ds a run for their money. Film is more forgiving even if you over or under expose a shot. iN b&w imo it's noi contest, film wins by a mile. Replicating film grain of say a tri-x and it's tonality is almost impossible in PP, though I heard alien skin comes close.

Art Pineda II

03-08-2007, 03:39 PM

hmmm.. film photography has been with us for around 150 years with or so since its advent while the digital photography in the 80's...:Thinking: thus, i think film photography has proven a lot already. and digital film still has a lot Gig/Terrabyte to fill.

the ease, instant feedback and cost effectiveness of digital imaging is what makes it popular to most i guess. but quality wise, there will always be a next best digital camera to try to beat a good old reliable film camera. hehehe

was trying to look for filmphotographer.com.ph.. to get feedback.. ala! hehe
peace!:Grin:

Glen Arreglo

03-08-2007, 04:57 PM

I heard my friend say that film cameras produces better images than digital cameras.. is there a basis to this? what is their justification?

just wondering.. :Grin: a 35 mm slide film is about 22 to 25 megapixels even mark II 1ds is short to that...

Bobby Timonera

03-08-2007, 05:35 PM

a 35 mm slide film is about 22 to 25 megapixels even mark II 1ds is short to that...
I think it's not only the pixels that matter. I can make a hi-end scanner and produce 1,000 megapixels from a 35mm film. But will I get an image as good a quality as that from a 1,000-megapixel digital camera?

One expert's (that's not me) view of film vs. digital, when comparing the antique D30 vs. slide film ...

"I was not prepared for this result. While I expected that the D30 would account itself well I never anticipated that it would actually produce an image that in most ways is superior to film. I'm drawn to the unavoidable conclusion that the Canon D30, when shooting in RAW mode, is able to produce comparable images to Provia 100F scanned on a high-end scanner. Now, ain't that a surprise?"

We're talking D30 here, a 3-megapixel dSLR released eons ago, not the 30D, which has 8mp. And who among us here can claim better experience than THE man?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d30/d30_vs_film.shtml

Bobby T.

bernard billedo

03-08-2007, 08:17 PM

MikeDougan

03-08-2007, 08:54 PM

You forgot to mention the density range advantage that film has :)

I love the convenience that digital gives me, but film -- particularly slide film gives me the satisfaction of creating images. No ACR, no postprocessing... just perfect well exposed slides.

You are correct, when you put your slides on a light table the WOW is so great that no digital camera (even $50k MF backs) can compete.

and I have to respectfully disagree with Bobby T's and Michael R's opinions. I use a 12.8mp 5D and I agree that it competes well with 35mm film but MF film blows everything digital out of the water.

I wonder if you asked MR now about his comments regarding the D30 if he'd blush slightly and offer some sort of alternative opinion.

I respect MR and check his site often but he is apt to voice opinions that are just his own opinions, and remember he scanned those trannies, so the poor results are probably due to the poor scanner he used.

Mike

Bobby Timonera

03-08-2007, 10:08 PM

I respect MR and check his site often but he is apt to voice opinions that are just his own opinions, and remember he scanned those trannies, so the poor results are probably due to the poor scanner he used.

Mike,

Cared to check the scanner he used? :)

If there's one man who uses high-end in each and every piece of equipment he uses, MR's the man.

Why don't you try emailing the man? I can guess he answers email.

Bobby T.

MikeDougan

03-09-2007, 07:05 AM

Yup, I checked Bobby "Imacon FlexTight Photo" at 3200dpi but obviosly something is wrong as he is only getting a 34Mb file. My scans at 2400 dpi 48 bit colour produce 180Mb files.

As stated above the resolving power of 35mm film is around 24Mp so there is no way I can believe (Not even the GOD MR) that the D30 was better that the Provia 100F.

Mike

MikeDougan

03-09-2007, 07:11 AM

A quote from another man that many here consider to be a GOD, Ken Rockwell...

"It's the artist, not the medium, which defines quality."

"Debating which is better is as silly as debating girls vs. boys or apples vs. oranges or oils vs. Prismacolor. It all depends on what you want done. Ignore people who insist that one is better than the other without stating their end purpose. It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish."

full article here.. http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm

Mike

Bobby Timonera

03-09-2007, 07:58 AM

We can go technical about things, even use calculus and rocket science to prove our point. But only one thing I can say -- my pictures became better, and I enjoyed photography much more, when I went digital.

Of course it was different when I was starting out doing almost purely b&w work for years. Maybe coz I had a big role in the process, doing everything from processing my rolls to making my prints in my darkroom at home. But when I was doing color and dropped my rolls in the lab and came back an hour after to pick up my prints, I was not too confident to claim those pictures were mine, coz all I did was compose and shoot.

OK, I admit image quality is debatable in film vs. digital, as much supporters on both camps (well, I admit the number about supporters isn't researched). But I hate it when I go back to my negatives taken a year or two ago, and color has shifted, dust and scratches abound. Unless you have the resources of a National Geographic or a Time-Life, it really ain't easy preserving your negs in this hot, humid tropical country. The first digital images I made 5 years ago can still give me prints as clean as when I first took the files to the lab to make prints.

Now, I wonder why we're all debating it here. Maybe we just don't take enough good pictures. The ones who really take the best pictures don't have time for endless debates like this, eh.

Now, back to my homeroasted, manually ground Yemen Mocha Mattari coffee...

Bobby T.

JonDexterTan

03-09-2007, 08:02 AM

Sonny Thakur

03-09-2007, 08:07 AM

@Dex,

You can process Tmax at home :)

@Mike,
You know my say on the topic :)

JonDexterTan

03-09-2007, 08:19 AM

@sonny -- thanks fro that suggestion, but you know i don't have time for that anymore. ;)

MikeDougan

03-09-2007, 08:31 AM

hi mike. i am an owner of two 30D bodies and a handful of canon lenses. for some (good) reason, i've been recently pulled towards exploring film photography. and as much as i've read and researched, to get a totally new experience from shooting my 30D, i've decided to get an MF instead of getting a 35mm (thank God the Leicas are out of my reach). my Bronica ETRSi outfit just arrived last tuesday (from ebay) and for the past few days it replaced my 70-200 L's place in my bag (i use my 30D's metering hehe). i've so much enjoyed using it. can't wait to send my rolls to Studio 58 (i'm in Davao and as far as i know, nobody can process my tmax films here anymore) and get my contact prints.

i'm not saying i'm giving up on digital as i love to take actions shots and i'm pretty sure i'm going to have a hard time doing that with the ol' bronica hehe. but reading this thread makes me feel good i got the bronnie. i hope i can learn much from you guys in the future.

:D

Jon,

You will not regret spending the money on a Bronica, I also have a Bronica EC (6 by 6 format).

120 film beats digital, no argument there, unless you have $50,000 spare for a digital back of some 40 mega pixels or so.

35mm film and digital are just different, digital is by far more convenient but 35mm film has quality's that digital can not beat.

Processing T Max at home is cheap and easy, I'd recommend HC110 as your developer. However Studio 58 is the best lab in the Philippines, the finished film and its presentation is first class. I have used other labs that cost less but I always get my film back covered in scratches and dust.

The popularity of 120 film has been rising steadily through 2006, to the point that Fuji and Kodak have been caught out by the demand for it. 35mm film may die out in the long term but I doubt 120 will.

What hooked me on film????

The first time in Studio 58 that my slides were put on the light table I went "WOW, thats amazing!" For now digital does not give me that buzz.

For anybody in any doubt I'd strongly recommend you pick up a cheap old MF camera and half a dozen roll's of 120. Your results will amaze you, and if it dosen't you'll always find a buyer for that camera/unused film :Grin:

I don't knock digital, its what got me interested in photography, it is easy to learn with digital, your results and your mistakes are easy to see plus there is very little cost to taking 1000's of images however I now get a real kick out of shooting a couple of rolls of film (24 exposures total) and getting 24 unique images with a high success rate (18 to 20 out of the 24 I will be very happy with).

Mike

Marton_Benitez

03-09-2007, 09:44 AM

I don't knock digital, its what got me interested in photography, it is easy to learn with digital, your results and your mistakes are easy to see plus there is very little cost to taking 1000's of images however I now get a real kick out of shooting a couple of rolls of film (24 exposures total) and getting 24 unique images with a high success rate (18 to 20 out of the 24 I will be very happy with).

Mike

Definitely feel the same way.

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 01:03 PM

The first time in Studio 58 that my slides were put on the light table I went "WOW, thats amazing!" For now digital does not give me that buzz.

Mike

Same feeling I get when I see beautiful women.:)

Gil Penaflorida

03-09-2007, 01:25 PM

This beauty vs your dslr why not we try one time to have a shootout, no PP just out of camera results filters allowed let's have a film / digital shootout EB.....

http://i16.tinypic.com/2j2wytf.jpg

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 01:39 PM

This beauty vs your dslr why not we try one time to have a shootout, no PP just out of camera results filters allowed let's have a film / digital shootout EB.....

That'll be interesting... Wouldn't it be disadvantageous for digital shooters if they're shooting against this 120 format beauty right here. A 35mm film vs. digital would even out the playing field IMO.

mitzpicardal

03-09-2007, 01:42 PM

I'll accept the challenge if we allow PP :)

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 01:48 PM

I'll accept the challenge if we allow PP :)
LOL! This cracked me up. I'm sure they'll allow you to use RAW editing software.

mitzpicardal

03-09-2007, 02:01 PM

Film VS Digital is just like Mac VS PC.

Why don't we just enumerate what film can that digital cannot do (output based).

Bobby Timonera

03-09-2007, 02:02 PM

Or how about calling on the MF digital shooters? I suppose MagicEye has one. Or the likes of Francis Abraham?

MelvinSevilla

03-09-2007, 02:03 PM

That'll be interesting... Wouldn't it be disadvantageous for digital shooters if they're shooting against this 120 format beauty right here. A 35mm film vs. digital would even out the playing field IMO.

I would agree with Bernard. The current DSLR's are trying to "mimic" the 35mm format anyways.

As for me, I started with film, but regained my love for photography via digital. Right now, I love both formats, and I see the beauty of each medium. Film vs. digital discussion is like 35mm vs med-format discussions. Flexibility for the former, quality for the later.

Now, stepping outside of that 'political correctness', if we talk image quality FOR NOW, I'll go with film anytime, anywhere. However, digital offers so much more other than quality, with cost and convenience being the top reasons.

The reason i gave emphasis to "FOR NOW" is that film is better than film FOR NOW. Lets give digital sometime to catch up. Film started out crappy (like the murky albumen stuff of the 1900's). But over the last century, it has improved a lot. I don't have any doubt in my mind that digital (or something else) will be as good (or even better in IQ???) than film in the coming years.

Thus, in the future, such discussions will be a thing of the past. :)

Bobby Timonera

03-09-2007, 02:04 PM

Film VS Digital is just like Mac VS PC.

Why don't we just enumerate what film can that digital cannot do (output based).

Yeah, this endless debates again. Can we kill the one who started this thread for the zillionth time? :D

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 02:40 PM

Yeah, this endless debates again. Can we kill the one who started this thread for the zillionth time? :D
Hey this is a fun thread! Who started it anyway?

mitzpicardal

03-09-2007, 02:49 PM

Hey this is a fun thread!
And interesting too :). Haven't tried MF film so i'm very interested to know what it can do that the digital cam cannot. Aside from the smell of chemicals :)

Resolution? The largest images in the world are shot with digital (8.6 Gigapixel to date). Dynamic Range? HDR images (32 bit scene based) are shot and stored digitally. No film can capture and store an HDR image.

Gil Penaflorida

03-09-2007, 02:54 PM

I also shoot a lot with the D200 and I love the images i get out of it but for me it's digital for business/web sharing and film for the heart .......just for fun maybe one day we do a comparative, we'll never know unless we see it side by side with our own eyes same image same time pics taken.

This is a helthy exercise i know there are so many debates already in the web and digital is really fast catching up but just for fun let's do it.....we can organize a film shooter team, btw, i'll join film shooters, and have someone organize a DSLR shooting team....

My F3HP vs a 6-8 mp DSLR will be ok as long as there is no PP

http://i17.tinypic.com/4idbrb7.jpg

nino_carandang

03-09-2007, 03:03 PM

ive been shooting with MF for quite some time now. i actually havent touched my 1D for almost 3 months. one of the things i love of film (specifically MF) is the grain. ive noticed with plugins with photoshop that it doesnt quite duplicate film grain as i want it to be.

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 03:04 PM

@ Mitz - If 3 bracketed slide film images were stacked in Photoshop as an HDR image, we'll know how it stacks up against a digital HDR image.
@ Gil - Hey your Cokin P holder is not optimized for ultrawide shooting. I suggest you cut off 2 slots if you only use one filter at a time and trim the corners! hehehe.

Gil Penaflorida

03-09-2007, 03:05 PM

And interesting too :). Haven't tried MF film so i'm very interested to know what it can do that the digital cam cannot. Aside from the smell of chemicals :)

Resolution? The largest images in the world are shot with digital (8.6 Gigapixel to date). Dynamic Range? HDR images (32 bit scene based) are shot and stored digitally. No film can capture and store an HDR image.

Brother you can do a high res scan from film and store it in whatever format you want .....ther's no camera that can physically handle that large sensor....what we are discussing here are cameras.....

Gil Penaflorida

03-09-2007, 03:07 PM

Pia Sison

03-09-2007, 03:08 PM

My sentiments, exactly---digital for the business, film (b&w) for the art and heart.
But this is just my personal opinion. No one else has to agree :) .

I also shoot a lot with the D200 and I love the images i get out of it but for me it's digital for business/web sharing and film for the heart .......just for fun maybe one day we do a comparative, we'll never know unless we see it side by side with our own eyes same image same time pics taken.

This is a helthy exercise i know there are so many debates already in the web and digital is really fast catching up but just for fun let's do it.....we can organize a film shooter team, btw, i'll join film shooters, and have someone organize a DSLR shooting team....

My F3HP vs a 6-8 mp DSLR will be ok as long as there is no PP

http://i17.tinypic.com/4idbrb7.jpg

mitzpicardal

03-09-2007, 03:15 PM

@ Mitz - If 3 bracketed slide film images were stacked in Photoshop as an HDR image, we'll know how it stacks up against a digital HDR image.

When the film is scanned and merge in PS then i think its a digital image already :). If you can merge 3 slide film, then i can merge 5 RAW digital file to equal the film DR.

Like i said, this is endless :). One thing is for sure. HDR imaging is the future. And it will be digital.

Earl Gonzalez

03-09-2007, 03:17 PM

In fairness to Film, though digital really is the way to go for me... I really like the way it pulls out DR in one slide ha. :)

mitzpicardal

03-09-2007, 03:17 PM

. one of the things i love of film (specifically MF) is the grain. ive noticed with plugins with photoshop that it doesnt quite duplicate film grain as i want it to be.

Agree, Grain. Now that's one reason on shooting film. Anything else?

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 03:20 PM

My friend that is not a wide lens it's a 135 2.8
I know but what if you used a Nikkor 20mm f/4 lens? Great cam btw.
I wish I could join a shootout but I guess I'll just have to watch from the sidelines.

@ mitz - if you're a wilderness photographer and you want to travel light and cannot recharge your digital camera batteries. A film cam would be advantageous as the batteries are lighter and last much longer.

Earl Gonzalez

03-09-2007, 03:20 PM

@ Mitz - Bro., 'found a thread that hits the spot ha... :Grin:

Gil Penaflorida

03-09-2007, 03:23 PM

I know but what if you used a Nikkor 20mm f/4 lens? Great cam btw.
I wish I could join a shootout but I guess I'll just have to watch from the sidelines.

That's ok bro......i'll shoot film scan it and clean it up with noise ninja Lol.....

mitzpicardal

03-09-2007, 03:24 PM

Brother you can do a high res scan from film and store it in whatever format you want .....ther's no camera that can physically handle that large sensor....what we are discussing here are cameras.....

And what is used with a high res scanner? It's a digital sensor. And even if you use the highest end scanner you cannot extract an HDR image from a single slide.

Ooops, i thought we're talking about the medium and not the camera. Sorry. This will be my last post on this topic :)

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 03:30 PM

And what is used with a high res scanner? It's a digital sensor. And even if you use the highest end scanner you cannot extract an HDR image from a single slide.

Ooops, i thought we're talking about the medium and not the camera. Sorry. This will be my last post on this topic :)
yeah you're right. my bad. you can still post hehehe

mitzpicardal

03-09-2007, 03:31 PM

@ mitz - if you're a wilderness photographer and you want to travel light and cannot recharge your digital camera batteries. A film cam would be advantageous as the batteries are lighter and last much longer.

Opps sorry to post again. I wont argue anymore which is better. This is what im asking in my first post. I'll enumerate now. I think this is what the original poster wanted to know.

Why/When do we shoot film?
1. Grain. No software can duplicate film grain yet.
2. Battery. No charger outside. Long exposure. Until they can invent a single battery that can last days without recharging and a sensor that is not affected by heat and humidity.
3.
4.
5.

Earl Gonzalez

03-09-2007, 03:34 PM

And what is used with a high res scanner? It's a digital sensor. And even if you use the highest end scanner you cannot extract an HDR image from a single slide.

Solid point taken... Thanks Mitz! :)

David Tong

03-09-2007, 03:46 PM

Despite the fact that I haven't owned a DSLR that long, there's really still something about the anticipation and lack of LCD review that makes film squeeze that extra "passion" on your photos... I really miss the film grain look of B&W photos, with color, not as much since PP really can be superior to film in terms of controlling color.

I'm so tempted to get a rangefinder or an old Nikon F series or Canon AE-1 or an Oly from ebay again hehe.

The anticipation of seeing the print is priceless IMO hehe.

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 03:49 PM

I wonder if HDR images count as you are stacking several images anyway instead of comparing one image taken with slide film compared to one image taken with a digital camera tweaked in ACR only.

Earl Gonzalez

03-09-2007, 04:18 PM

I wonder if HDR images count as you are stacking several images anyway instead of comparing one image taken with slide film compared to one image taken with a digital camera tweaked in ACR only.

Technically they still count Bernard, however, considerable workflow is quite obvious... vs. the dynamic range of a slide film, post processed and directly printed and not digitized in anyway... Gives one some point of pondering, doesn't it? :)

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 04:24 PM

True. The advantage of shooting both is you have the best of both worlds. Shoot what is best in any given situation and enjoy the results.

JonDexterTan

03-09-2007, 04:24 PM

The anticipation of seeing the print is priceless IMO hehe.

Amen to that brother! :) btw, got my bronnie from ebay.

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 04:28 PM

Amen to that brother! :) btw, got my bronnie from ebay.
Hmmm are we talking about prints from film or digital?
Congrats Jon! When are we gonna see some test shots?

Earl Gonzalez

03-09-2007, 04:37 PM

Likewise... Congrats Jon... 'Long time... :)

Test shots please... :)

David Tong

03-09-2007, 05:02 PM

So tempted...

http://cgi.ebay.com/CANON-AE-1-AE1-MINOLTA-XG-1-XG1-FILM-CAMERAS-AND-ACC_W0QQitemZ130086493935QQcategoryZ107919QQrdZ1QQ cmdZViewItem

riapangilinan

03-09-2007, 06:21 PM

Yeah, this endless debates again. Can we kill the one who started this thread for the zillionth time? :D

sorry i was just curious with the statement of my friend. i do not take positions and i was not trying to make a debate.. but the title of the thread would contradict my intentions and i apologize. it was mere curiousity. peace!

i'm just a noob and i started with digital so i don't have much experience with film cameras... i can't even follow the posts anymore! hihi

:D

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 06:32 PM

sorry i was just curious with the statement of my friend. i do not take positions and i was not trying to make a debate.. but the title of the thread would contradict my intentions and i apologize. it was mere curiousity. peace!

i'm just a noob and i started with digital so i don't have much experience with film cameras... i can't even follow the posts anymore! hihi

:D
hi ria! why don't you try shooting a roll of film esp. slide film and tell us what you think.

JonDexterTan

03-09-2007, 07:10 PM

thanks bernard and earl :) hahaha! if i get good shots and as soon as i get some contact prints from bengy or have few scanned. another 2 weeks maybe? have a few more rolls left. :D excited though. really excited!

riapangilinan

03-09-2007, 07:13 PM

hi ria! why don't you try shooting a roll of film esp. slide film and tell us what you think.

slide film? huhu sounds expensive? i'm still a student and i don't have much money.. but maybe someday i will try to shoot film. i have my old canon 3000v when i started but it's now in storage because films are expensive...

:Scared:

Chelo Pascua

03-09-2007, 07:38 PM

And interesting too :). Haven't tried MF film so i'm very interested to know what it can do that the digital cam cannot. Aside from the smell of chemicals :)

Resolution? The largest images in the world are shot with digital (8.6 Gigapixel to date). Dynamic Range? HDR images (32 bit scene based) are shot and stored digitally. No film can capture and store an HDR image.

PM me your address and I`ll send you one (mamiya M645 + 80mm f2.8 lens + several velvias) - free of charge.

David Tong

03-09-2007, 07:53 PM

Chelo: Really? hehe...

Chelo Pascua

03-09-2007, 08:00 PM

Chelo: Really? hehe...

Yup! But I hope he can bring it with him during hikes. :Grin:

Sorry only one spare body hehehehe...

David Tong

03-09-2007, 08:06 PM

Hehehe... you'll never know... I tried holding the display unit in Pentax (645N ata), man it's cumbersome hehe.

Chelo Pascua

03-09-2007, 08:10 PM

:Grin:based on your avatar - you'll need those strong biceps for that 645N :Grin:

David Tong

03-09-2007, 08:16 PM

That's actually my 3yo son hehehe...

bernard billedo

03-09-2007, 08:28 PM

slide film? huhu sounds expensive? i'm still a student and i don't have much money.. but maybe someday i will try to shoot film. i have my old canon 3000v when i started but it's now in storage because films are expensive...

:Scared: you can just start out with one roll. I suggest Provia 100F which produces more pleasing skin tones than Velvia 100/100F. I'm not sure how much they cost but the last time roll I bought cost me P305. Try shooting one frame each day just to even out the cost and it will force you to get picky when shooting.

mitzpicardal

03-09-2007, 11:47 PM

PM me your address and I`ll send you one (mamiya M645 + 80mm f2.8 lens + several velvias) - free of charge.

You sure? I'll take all the pain in carrying it up to the summit. I'll even leave my trail food so as to accomodate this MF in my backpack. :).

Jojo Guingona

03-10-2007, 12:11 AM

Hi everyone,
This issue is no longer even worth discussing. With the resolution of the digital cameras available today, film is only for the hopeless romantics. There are tools in PHOTOSHOP that can even simulate the look of film if you really miss the grain.
I've been doing this full time for the past 10 years and I started with a Hasselblad, which is still in a corner of my studio, i'm still hoping that eventually some reputable company will come out with a digital back for medium format cameras that will not require the sale of my kidneys. If the price drops close to a top of the line D-SLR, i'll probably join the fray. As of the last 5 years, i've been using digital cameeras. I went through a D1x, a D100, 2 Kodak Pro SLR/n bodies, and now I'm usng a D2x and a D200 and I kept one Kodak only because of it's full frame format.
Anyway, if you could charge a premium for your gear, then fine, but that's not the case. Besides, we produced our Large 8 images with mostly D-SLRs. That's 10 feet by 6.5 feet. How much more do you need??? I used Genuine Fractals to interpolate my images but I am also demo-ing Alien Skin's Blow-up and am quite impressed, I think I will be buying it. I hope I've shed some light on the subject and have put some of your apprehensions to rest.

Best regards,
Jojo Guingona

dave_deluria

03-10-2007, 12:16 AM

Slightly OT:

I can't wait to see your exhibit when it hits Megamall (walking distance from my office).

Glen Arreglo

03-10-2007, 07:42 PM

I think it's not only the pixels that matter. I can make a hi-end scanner and produce 1,000 megapixels from a 35mm film. But will I get an image as good a quality as that from a 1,000-megapixel digital camera?

One expert's (that's not me) view of film vs. digital, when comparing the antique D30 vs. slide film ...

"I was not prepared for this result. While I expected that the D30 would account itself well I never anticipated that it would actually produce an image that in most ways is superior to film. I'm drawn to the unavoidable conclusion that the Canon D30, when shooting in RAW mode, is able to produce comparable images to Provia 100F scanned on a high-end scanner. Now, ain't that a surprise?"

We're talking D30 here, a 3-megapixel dSLR released eons ago, not the 30D, which has 8mp. And who among us here can claim better experience than THE man?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d30/d30_vs_film.shtml

Bobby T. have you tried it yourself sir? do you always believe the net?

Roland R. Roldan

03-11-2007, 08:14 AM

ah basta, when am on assignment i shoot digital with film/analog cam as backup. Up to this stage of digital's development, di pa gaanong advanced/refined what with the dreaded "error 99" of Canon, memory card being corrupted, etc. I love both analog and digital. Another, kapag nasira yung film cam, at least I can recover my earlier shots (hwag lang sirain ng developer...careless....).

Harvey_Chua

03-11-2007, 09:27 AM

In year 2000, when we first invested in a digital back, we increased prices of digital photography over film by 15%. We pointed out that we saved clients the extra cost of scanning, and of waiting around 4 days for their scanned images. Digital photography was new and we needed to convince our clients to switch to digital and at the same time be willing to pay the extra cost. Today, we will charge more for shooting film - not because film is better, but because it is getting more and more difficult to buy and use film.

As regards the point about digital quality not being as good as film, that is no longer true. In this forum, I have read 120mm film being compared to 35mm digital output. That's like comparing apples and oranges. When comparing results of comparative tests between digital and film, all elements must be the same except that which are being compared. For example, we can test the use of a Hasselblad camera shooting exactly the same thing under the same lights with the same lenses, except in one we use film in a film magazine and in the other, using a digital back. That then, would be a fair test.

We are confident of the quality of our digital output, and now we shoot digital exclusively. No more film. Four years ago, we removed our darkroom and gained a lot of space. We use PhaseOne digital backs with Hasselblads, Sinar 4x5 cameras and Digiflex bodies with Nikon lenses, (or Canon or Nikon for 35mm formats) and no one among our clients still asks for film, and no one among our photographers would shoot in film. We all know the convenience of shooting digital, and for our clients, art directors and photographers- and even talents- to be able to sleep soundly because they've seen their images (and not spend the night and the next day praying that the lab did not ruin the films or that the photograher captured the images they have in mind) is simply priceless. (This is not to say that shooting digital is 100% risk-free - nothing in life is!).

Of course, this is our own experience and belief that we cannot impose on others. Each photographer is entitled to his own preference. I think what is important is for the right information to reach the photographers and clients as there is a lot of misinformation going around not just with film vs. digital, but with one kind of digital vs. another kind.

JonDexterTan

03-11-2007, 10:56 AM

this was posted on another photography thread, i'm not sure if it's been posted here already. it's an interesting read, especially for this thread.

read the article here (http://www.leicagallery.com/filmvsdigital.htm). :D

Jo Avila

03-11-2007, 09:06 PM

Yup. You've been shooting MF with my lightmeter for quite some time now :D

LOL!

ive been shooting with MF for quite some time now. i actually havent touched my 1D for almost 3 months. one of the things i love of film (specifically MF) is the grain. ive noticed with plugins with photoshop that it doesnt quite duplicate film grain as i want it to be.

Bobby Timonera

03-11-2007, 10:00 PM

have you tried it yourself sir?
I dont' have a D30, and I shot slides only on a very few occasions. But one thing I can tell you, my shots with my 300D (the first dSLR this poor promdi could afford), especially when shooting RAW, are far superior than the shots I made with my T90 or A1. At least when we talk of negative film, coz the serious shooting I did with slides, I submitted it to the one who gave the assignment. Of course what I have here are a different set of pictures taken with film, different set taken with digital. If you wanna see for yourself, I'll invite you to my home (may kalayuan lang ang Iligan). You can have my negs printed, and make prints with my shots taken with the 300D & 350D. Maybe you can't see the comparison at 3R or 4R. I'd suggest that they be blown up, maybe at 12x18, coz that's the biggest print we can make here in Timbuktu.

do you always believe the net?
Yes, Glen, I believe the Net, and I think it's about time you should, too. But I do not believe all of them, and I'm hoping you're wise enough to discern which sites to believe, which sites are trash. I'd rather believe the established professionals with decades of experience publishing their opinions with supported tests, than a lot of talk from forum members like us who enjoy debating till kingdom come w/o conducting the necessary tests. :)

Peace!

Bobby T.

Glen Arreglo

03-14-2007, 12:42 PM

I dont' have a D30, and I shot slides only on a very few occasions. But one thing I can tell you, my shots with my 300D (the first dSLR this poor promdi could afford), especially when shooting RAW, are far superior than the shots I made with my T90 or A1. At least when we talk of negative film, coz the serious shooting I did with slides, I submitted it to the one who gave the assignment. Of course what I have here are a different set of pictures taken with film, different set taken with digital. If you wanna see for yourself, I'll invite you to my home (may kalayuan lang ang Iligan). You can have my negs printed, and make prints with my shots taken with the 300D & 350D. Maybe you can't see the comparison at 3R or 4R. I'd suggest that they be blown up, maybe at 12x18, coz that's the biggest print we can make here in Timbuktu.

Sir you need not have a d30 to experiment with your 350d will do. The problem with that net guy is that he showed the scanned image of the slide and not the true image of the slide. It’s like tasting an apple but tasting the picture of an apple well that doesn’t taste good surely it tastes like paper hahaha. To see the real resolution of the slide one must print the picture from a slide directly can it be done? Well just take a look at it through a microscope or project it to a wall will do for sure. To know the slides resolution is also easy just multiply the horizontal by vertical and you’ll get approx 22 mp mathematically. The problem in here is to see the real image of the slide not the 2nd generation image.
Yes, Glen, I believe the Net, and I think it's about time you should, too. But I do not believe all of them, and I'm hoping you're wise enough to discern which sites to believe, which sites are trash. I'd rather believe the established professionals with decades of experience publishing their opinions with supported tests, than a lot of talk from forum members like us who enjoy debating till kingdom come w/o conducting the necessary tests. :)

Peace!

Bobby T. Not all people with vast experience and credibility are always correct they’re just human we all commit mistakes. I don’t always believe the net I analyze it first if it’s logical and sensible enough to be true. This case is a matter of mis-representation he should have titled it “Film scanner vs digital camera”. Smile

MikeDougan

08-10-2007, 01:52 PM

I've been thinking about this for a while, why keep a digital SLR when all I shoot now is film. I waited and waited but the 5D has only been used once this year. No desire to shoot it anymore........................ so today it goes to a new home.

Kind of strange, when I started with a 20D and people talked about learning the 'Dark room' I thought they were crazy.

I know some other people, not just here on DPP, are also thinking of giving on on digital? Who else here has done it or is thinking about it?

Mike
Digital free!

Jouvet Lee

08-10-2007, 01:58 PM

I have done it...disposed of all my digital and auto focus stuff...Now I am 100% film and manual focus only

MelvinSevilla

08-10-2007, 02:05 PM

I also thought about this. I want to go back to film (as i also own 3 old SLR cameras), mainly because everyone here has already joined the DSLR Bandwagon. I think DSLR is the new celfone, almost everyone has one. Before, I rarely see a person using a DSLR, but now, every Harry, Dick, Maria, Bhoy and Jhun is walking and using one. There's nothing wrong with that, but I always have this attitude of avoiding "the mainstream".

But why I haven't gone back to the (film) "light"? Maybe because, I suck in darkroom techniques. I used to develop film back in HS and College for fun, but totally out of it moreover with digital it has become somewhat "obsolete" for me. I wanted to have my darkroom. Probably, I'll convert the old shed at the back of our house into my own darkroom. Not sure yet.... Hhhhmmm... But lets see.... :)

Paeng Bonafe

08-10-2007, 02:16 PM

i agree with Melvin. seems a dSLR is a must have for people nowadays..

for me, i dont think i would throw my dSLR. i still shoot film. i do it side-by-side...

good thing with pentax, all MF lenses with K mount work with dSLR system. my primes are MF lenses. only my zoom(kit) lens is AF..

:Grin::):Grin:

when i was in germany, almost 80% carry film SLRs. i think i only saw 10 people including me with a dSLR..

MikeDougan

08-10-2007, 09:01 PM

I have done it...disposed of all my digital and auto focus stuff...Now I am 100% film and manual focus only

All my equipment is now manual! The pleasure derived from photography is directionally proportional to the effort involved!

Most of my cameras are over 50 years old!

Mike
Digital free!

MikeDougan

08-10-2007, 09:05 PM

nilampizaro

08-11-2007, 02:47 AM

Garret Ambrosio

08-11-2007, 02:52 AM

Sounds so drastic, I'm a middle of the road type, but progressive. I keep my A2E around and use it very seldom. I used both, but prefer digital for the less expensive overall costs, the PP advantages and convenience. But to each is their own, congrats on your decision and good luck.

rey anipan

08-11-2007, 04:22 AM

be it digital or analogue, what counts is you've captured a moment that you could share with everyone. :)

Tok Paler

08-11-2007, 04:44 AM

diegodanila

08-11-2007, 05:01 AM

I admire you all..." you are taking the road, less travelled ":)

Nat Pagayonan

08-11-2007, 05:14 AM

I admire you all..." you are taking the road, less travelled ":)

it used to be the most travelled road :Grin:

michaelsalomon

08-11-2007, 05:36 AM

it's not the lens that matters...

its what the eyes could see =)

its how you convert your dreams into megapixels =) (for digital)

its how you transform your dreams into colors (film naman)

oh bago na un ah... (no more indian-pana cliche)

Garret Ambrosio

08-11-2007, 05:59 AM

Amen, I think the problem nowadays and it is rampant throughout many photography boards is the emphasis and concentration on equipment. The postulation that the photographer with the best toys will win out over the poor sucker with the ELPH P&S. Nothing can be so far from the real truth. If that was the case, no one but w Hassey H3 would be taking breath taking shots. Equipment helps, but it is only half the battle. I think most people buy expensive camera equipment and don't even know what DOF, FL, and Aperture is.
I started with film (Minolta XD7) back in 1991 in my High School photo class. Didn't go DSLR until 2003 with the 20D. Sure I had P&S digitals, I still do. I also use my K800i cellular phone camera, I use whatever is available to catch the "moment" as a PP has mentioned.

David Tong

08-11-2007, 10:46 AM

I feel that this is a bit elitist (as someone once pointed out to me).

I agree that it somewhat sucks now that everyone who has cash to spare can own a DSLR just for the sheer heck of it, but i wouldn't go as far as saying that it is the new fashion accessory. But hey! who knows, that same person who bought a Php32000 camera might even be the next big name in photography!

Yes, the discipline that it takes to dispose of your digital paraphernalias is admirable, but i feel the photography is much more that what you use to capture that moment or vistas.

Pardon the cliche, but i always thought that a camera is only tool, indian-pana and all that i guess.. =)

Same sentiments... No offense to anyone, but the going-back-to-film-and-manual sentiment has a couple of angles to it, either you're really into the art of developing your own film (which is great) or you just want to be "different" and have other see you as a "better" photographer for not holding the same DSLR as everyone else...

Frankly, other than the medium (film vs CF/SD card), you can always go full manual and bypass all auto-features of a DSLR anyway.

I'm still planning to get an old film cam but not because of the bandwagon phenomenon, but I'm just more bothered with the weight and cost of carrying a heavy cam/lens around town and the cost of going full-frame...

Granted, if you print/post a good photo, I could care less if you shot it with film or digital.

But then again, it's your gear and your hobby, so who cares what others think...

Glenn Francisco

08-11-2007, 12:51 PM

started with film slr back in college...then jumped to digital just last year. i believe i learned alot from digital slr...and if im going back to film slr, i can apply what i've learned and be more creative.

I'm playing with my smena 8m now and it doesnt give me a hard time like it used to be.pribably because of what i've learned using M in dslr.

MikeDougan

08-11-2007, 03:13 PM

Same sentiments... No offense to anyone, but the going-back-to-film-and-manual sentiment has a couple of angles to it, either you're really into the art of developing your own film (which is great) or you just want to be "different" and have other see you as a "better" photographer for not holding the same DSLR as everyone else...

I think your totally wrong here! No angles involved! Not trying to be elitist either. Just the simple fact I find the final image more pleasing. Maybe because I've had to put more work into getting that image.

Frankly, other than the medium (film vs CF/SD card), you can always go full manual and bypass all auto-features of a DSLR anyway.

I'm still planning to get an old film cam but not because of the bandwagon phenomenon, but I'm just more bothered with the weight and cost of carrying a heavy cam/lens around town and the cost of going full-frame...

Granted, if you print/post a good photo, I could care less if you shot it with film or digital.

But then again, it's your gear and your hobby, so who cares what others think...

Your right, I don't care what people think but I've had this discussion with many people across the world and there is quite a few people who have come to the same conclusion. I didn't post this here to try and show off that I'm better etc..
I know a few people here have also talked about selling there digital cameras and sticking with film.

Mike

basil carating

08-11-2007, 03:41 PM

tsk..tsk..tsk.. i, myself, have more film equipment in a bin than you could shake a stick at. but i think that's where they are staying in the meantime. right now, my mindset (about going back to film) is- it's like going back to the "sahig" from the "banig". tough!

Derick_Gamboa

08-11-2007, 04:23 PM

MikeDougan

08-11-2007, 04:31 PM

I will never get to prepare for the future and where I am going with this hobby, if I do not marry the two. I think equipment will be secondary in this discussion. You can apply the same discipline MikeD is saying while using digital..........The pleasure derived from photography is directionally proportional to the effort involved!.

Mike, i'm watching you from "Left to Right", I will eventually get myself one of your toys!! :Grin::Grin:

You've hit the nail on the head Derick!

The sale of the 5D more than covered the cost of the 17 film cameras I have. Each one has it's own style and personality, I choice my tool for the day depending on that. Same with the film, the decision has to be made before hand on what effect you want to create.

I've just been reading the M8 review on DP Review.....
Part of the closing comments I though was very interesting

When I first got my hands on the M8 I have to admit it was my first experience of a rangefinder camera, I was also skeptical that there was still a place for such a significantly manually controlled camera in such an automatic world where every new camera removes one more layer of control from the photographer. And yet there we have the exact reason why the M8 and rangefinders continue to succeed (once you discover them), they re-connect you to your subject, they draw you into the scene (big viewfinder, no mirror black-out) and they force you to make decisions about focus and depth of field which to most digital SLR users are 'lost in the half-press'.

Mike
(Still looking for a Mamiya 6!)

Pilar Tuason

08-11-2007, 05:07 PM

In my opinion, shooting analog and digital both have different "rituals" and I personally have a different "feeling" or approach when I shoot one or the other. When shooting analog, you tend to slow down a bit more.. You dont have the luxury of taking a peek if you caught the moment, if the exposure is correct or if your composition is exactly how you want it to be. Your instincts are a bit more on their toes and you are more "one" with your camera. With digital, you tend to shoot more and experiment. Some photographers dont even think and let the camera think for them. When I travel and bring my digital gear, I feel like I must take photos. When I travel and bring my analog camera, ( a leica m6 rangefinder), I dont feel like a "slave" to my gear... Then again, it could be that when I shoot digital, I have my big camera, the huge lenses, the huge bag, the tripod ect....and when I shoot analog, I bring my trusty leica, 2 lenses and some rolls of film ( all fits perfectly in my purse:Grin:) and I feel free from all weight and actually enjoy the trip more and save my energy for taking photos. However, I go through stages and moods....there are times when I dont feel like shooting analog at all.....and times where I just have to take my digital camera out and take photos. So i stick to the best of both worlds and see how my mood is and pick up the camera that suits me. There is no right or wrong... Mike has found his connection with analog...its got nothing to do with being "unique" or wanting to stand out.

Vic Rosales

08-11-2007, 06:04 PM

Derick_Gamboa

08-11-2007, 06:34 PM

Mike
(Still looking for a Mamiya 6!)

How come these seem to be the flavor and theme of the period! Just came off a long lunch this afternoon. And after the intensive and informative meeting, there' s only one thing recommended by my friend..............Contax and an 80mm Carl Zeiss lens!:Grin::Grin::Grin:

MikeDougan

08-11-2007, 06:57 PM

How come these seem to be the flavor and theme of the period! Just came off a long lunch this afternoon. And after the intensive and informative meeting, there' s only one thing recommended by my friend..............Contax and an 80mm Carl Zeiss lens!:Grin::Grin::Grin:

Only the Mamiya 6, Hasselblad 501/503's and Rolleiflex's are holding there prices.

You can get a Hasselblad SWC for around $1500. That was a $10,000 camera!

Funny you should mention a Contax...........
Just been looking at a G2 and a 28mm Biogon!

Mike

MikeDougan

08-11-2007, 07:52 PM

While doing some research for another camera I stumbeled across this article.

http://www.davebeckerman.com/general/darkroom-digital.html

Mike

Pilar Tuason

08-11-2007, 08:58 PM

Which reminds me.... I went to see Isa Lorenzo's show in Silver Lens Gallery. She had 35 beautiful silver halide prints she printed herself.... with multiple exposures done in the dark room and ......I could not stop staring at the prints...they were gorgeous. Now, I am itching for analog again.........

ari_velazco

08-11-2007, 10:11 PM

Ive waited an hour to get my turn on this free internet access in my hotel here in
Bohol. Its my first time here..Here for a seminar, i brought with me two cameras, Miya(mamiya) and niki(nikon Fm2) and 3 rolls of velvia...wasnt able to go around that much....it wouldve been safe if i brought the D70 instead..but film is too much...i'm drugged. :)

Cant wait to head to Stud58..

Mike, i almost traded my D70 for an F100...but i thought...an F5 might just show up in the FS sections :D

delfinotiongco

08-18-2007, 10:51 AM

tmo_medrano

08-18-2007, 11:19 AM

BW printing is the best! i just experienced it in school for the first time and i can say im addicted... too bad i had to save my photo papers for other plates :( anyway, i plan to shoot BW film for personal satisfaction then shoot digital for my "rackets"... its good to have both... :)

MelvinSevilla

08-18-2007, 11:30 AM

How is this for film versatility:

My wife have B&W negatives taken in New Jersey in 1946. The negatives were in various odd sizes. I have an Omega D2 enlarger that will take up to 4x5. All I did was jury rig my 6x7 negative carrier. Made prints in no time all.

Now imagine the imcompatable RAW files currently in use. What guarantee there is if the format now in 2007 will be usable with whatever format comes then?

How about constant upgade? I still have a dot matix printer in good condition but a technology orphan and passe.

In 1947m when Polaroid film came about. Many thought film will be dead since people will want instant photos. B&W survive.

I am one of those optimist.

Dan T

Sir,

VERY GOOD POINT!!! You really got me thinking about file compatability in the future. More than 15years ago when I was in grade school, I used to work on WordPerfect (there was no Windows yet, just MS-DOS era). Now there are WordPerfect is gone just MSOffice Word (and current versions can't support WordPerfect whereas earlier versions does support it). I even wonder where my grade school paper files are right now....

We all take photos for memories. We hope that these memories will last a lifetime, but again software brands are owned by companies. In the IT industry, we sometimes outlive software brands and/or companies which is quite probable that our current RAW files won't run on a new post-processing software 10-15years from now. Also, Jpeg has been here for a long-time, but how sure are we it will last for the next 10years with Microsoft trying to create better versions of it.

Well, I guess the only way to really preserve your memories is to print them all. Hhhhhmmmm.... I wonder how much will 10K+ photos costs in 8R prints.... Hehehehe!

Miguel Vecin

08-18-2007, 12:07 PM

Good point there...

@Melvin - if you print all that in 8r it will cost you a lot of money..like 500k he he :)

David Tong

08-18-2007, 01:08 PM

But the printing argument is different from FORMAT argument (digital vs. film), both mediums can be archived through prints.

MikeDougan

08-18-2007, 08:49 PM

But the printing argument is different from FORMAT argument (digital vs. film), both mediums can be archived through prints.

Yes but the RAW file may not have software that can decode it in 15 years time. You could end up like the Space shuttle (running on Z80 processors) and have to keep an old PC running just to view your RAW files.

The negative film has been around for well over 100 years, it's proven it's longevity!

Anyhow, this has nothing to do with why I switched from 'Digital' to film. It has to do with the fact that I just get a bigger (much bigger) kick out of the final result on film compared to digital. With digital I felt I was just pushing a button, the camera did everything else.

A lot of photographers seem to have got into the habbit of fixing there mistakes in Photoshop or creating there image in Photoshop. Thats not a photographey, thats digital art and is something totally different from Photography.

Mike

MelvinSevilla

08-18-2007, 09:03 PM

But the printing argument is different from FORMAT argument (digital vs. film), both mediums can be archived through prints.

Actually that is not my reason... Yes, you can print both. What I meant by my last statement is that if there are no software to run my current RAW files, I will be forced to print all my RAW files NOW, so I don't totally lose them. If I use film, the negatives will remain more than 10-15years compared to digital raw files (considering you take proper care of your negs).

:)

jedllamas

08-18-2007, 11:11 PM

I always feel a higher sense of satisfaction when I get good shots (not underexposed/overexposed, rightly framed decisive moment) from my 2000-peso worth Canonet rangefinder because I know I used my brain in getting the right aperture and speed and not the camera's brain.:)

Dennis Nunez

08-18-2007, 11:23 PM

right now im going back to film...
i have repaired my uncle's old yashica electro 35 gtn, sold my canon eos 650 and purchased a nikon slr manual focus... hope to jam with you guys...

delfinotiongco

08-19-2007, 12:06 AM

A lot of photographers seem to have got into the habbit of fixing there mistakes in Photoshop or creating there image in Photoshop. Thats not a photographey, thats digital art and is something totally different from Photography.
Mike

Mike, good point and I agree with you. I tend to be lazy when I am capturing images with my digital camera. The reality is that, if there are no details captured in the image, no matter how much manipulation you do be it photoshop or developong film; will salvage your image.

I boils down to the skills of the photographer. In film, you are forced to think before you press that shutter. It will be your final image. Yes, film photographers do bracket exposures, plan for either over/under developing films. On the other hand, film photographers do not think in terms of "Ah, I will fix this later on PP". In the end, we all want to capture that perfect photo.

One thing different about photography is that we do not create images from scratch by virtue of the technology. We CAPTURE the instant of what we FEEL and SEE at that moment. Or we visualize, adjust our technique (like the zone system) accordingly to replicate the image we saw when we make the final print.

Would it be nice to have all the tehnical mumbo jumbo taken care it before we press the shutter? I'd rather make straight prints that dodge/burn excessively.

My take.

Dan T

Terence Sysunbin

08-19-2007, 12:50 AM

I've been thinking about this for a while, why keep a digital SLR when all I shoot now is film. I waited and waited but the 5D has only been used once this year. No desire to shoot it anymore........................ so today it goes to a new home.

Mike
Digital free!

Thanks for the wonderful gift mike I thought you were shitting me when you said you were gonna give it to me for free!!!. We'll I guess you're not. Thanks again for the wonderful token my friend. My wife also sends her many thanks for the truckload of chicharon and pastillas that came with the 5D I really appreciate it.

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 04:03 AM

Would it be nice to have all the tehnical mumbo jumbo taken care it before we press the shutter? I'd rather make straight prints that dodge/burn excessively.

My take.

Dan T

Ha ha ha, I wasn't going to bring up the subject of darkroom manipulation but now that you have......... :Grin:

Mike

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 04:06 AM

Thanks for the wonderful gift mike I thought you were shitting me when you said you were gonna give it to me for free!!!. We'll I guess you're not. Thanks again for the wonderful token my friend. My wife also sends her many thanks for the truckload of chicharon and pastillas that came with the 5D I really appreciate it.

Next time your passing by I'll give you some of those L paperweights that are cluttering up my desk.

Mike

Erwin Feliciano

08-19-2007, 05:27 AM

Next time your passing by I'll give you some of those L paperweights that are cluttering up my desk.

Mike

Mike, can I pass by your place too? I can surely use some L paperweights! :Grin:

Pilar Tuason

08-19-2007, 07:24 AM

Since someone brought up the RAW software and compatibility issue up..I would just like to add my 2 cents......I have read somewhere that the digital era is the era of lost images.....why? only a small fraction of digital shooters print their images. they get stored in their hard drives or get uploaded in the internet to unprintable sizes and yes maybe even 5 years from now the software will be totally different and if you dont CONSTANTLY upgrade your software or PRINT those images, you will most likely loose them inn the future. lets add to the fact that your computer crashes and your memories get wiped out in a fraction of a second.......backup, print and upgrade your software. ALL THE TIME if you want to save your precious memories

ricky_ladia

08-19-2007, 08:03 AM

delfinotiongco

08-19-2007, 08:49 AM

The problem right now with digital files is that there is no Universal way to read the files.

Mind you, the files are just bunch of 0s and 1s.

It is the way the manufacturers spoonfeed us on how files are read. Adobe is trying to sponsor the Digital Negative (DNG) http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/. Hopefully the players agree on something.

Like Pilar said, just keep backing up your files and hope that the next format is compatable with what you've got.

Try opening a Word 95 file with Word 2003. Microsoft don't even have a converter that I know of.

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 09:20 AM

Hi Mike,
I would love to go back to the film era, so little competition then, photographers are judged by the prints they made without the help of computers. Sadly, i can't, photography is my only means of living and most of my clients prefer that i shoot digital... which means (as Pilar said) that i should back up regularly and update my files/captures.
I still keep a couple of film Nikons and also a couple of medium format cameras, hoping that when i get wise (and older!) i will be able to use them again. But why wait? i live in southernmost part of Bulacan so maybe we can shoot sometime, with film.... thanks!!! :)

I'm lucky in that I'm not a Pro, nor do I have a desire to be one. Therefore I can choose the medium to suit my needs not my clients needs.

Unfortunately if your a Pro you have no choice other than to shoot digital. In the same way that people were told that VHS was better than Betamax, that CD was better than Vinyl it is perceived that digital is better than film.

I'm in San Miguel maybe we'll meet up sometimes and shoot some film with these old cameras....... :)

Mike

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 09:22 AM

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 09:34 AM

Id like to join you guys on that one...I have a few film cameras (Holga, Smena, Lubitel, etc...)

So Mike - Do you print all the picture you take or just store them as negative and prin t the ones you really like?

I'm lucky in that I'm not a Pro, nor do I have a desire to be one. Therefore I can choose the medium to suit my needs not my clients needs.

Unfortunately if your a Pro you have no choice other than to shoot digital. In the same way that people were told that VHS was better than Betamax, that CD was better than Vinyl it is perceived that digital is better than film.

I'm in San Miguel maybe we'll meet up sometimes and shoot some film with these old cameras....... :)

Mike

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 09:39 AM

Id like to join you guys on that one...I have a few film cameras (Holga, Smena, Lubitel, etc...)

So Mike - Do you print all the picture you take or just store them as negative and prin t the ones you really like?

Miguel,

Thats a bit of a sore point!! I want to buy a 17 inch printer so I can start printing some of my work. Currently everything is stored on 6 HDD's (3 master and 3 backups).

Why is it a sore point? well Canon and I are not the best of friends, I have no problem buying a large format printer but not when the local price is nearly double the US/UK price.

Mike

Derick_Gamboa

08-19-2007, 09:40 AM

@Mike, Miguel, Ricky, Pilar - count me in too!
@Dan, it would be nice to have you in Manila, would be a pleasure to have coffe and pick your mind. Interesting points of view! :):)

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 09:46 AM

Nike,

Thats a pity. Its the usual problem here in the Philippines. Things are just way too overpriced. And to think we earn 1/4 of what they earn there :(

Miguel,

Thats a bit of a sore point!! I want to buy a 17 inch printer so I can start printing some of my work. Currently everything is stored on 6 HDD's (3 master and 3 backups).

Why is it a sore point? well Canon and I are not the best of friends, I have no problem buying a large format printer but not when the local price is nearly double the US/UK price.

Mike

Terence Sysunbin

08-19-2007, 09:48 AM

Next time your passing by I'll give you some of those L paperweights that are cluttering up my desk.

Mike

Sure thing compadre can I get the Long White ones? hehehe (am I asking too much?) :Grin:

ricky_ladia

08-19-2007, 10:43 AM

Hey Derick "themindpicker"! :D
Let's set a date and shoot film, just bought some 120's from studio 58 and i'm eager to use it rain or shine!!!

Miguel, have that digiprint bus ready! hahahaha!!!

Pilar... can we still borrow you from Nick even if you're still carrying your second precious one? hehehe!

I really wanna see photographers shooting without chimping! :)

What do you say Mike??

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 10:45 AM

@ Ricky - hehehe sure basta film lang - no digital.

I doubt Pilar will make it. She is due anytime now hehehe

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 10:52 AM

ricky_ladia

08-19-2007, 10:54 AM

Miguel, strictly FILM and no cameras with LCD!:D

Mike... can we use polaroids??? hehehehe!

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 10:56 AM

Miguel, strictly FILM and no cameras with LCD!:D

Mike... can we use polaroids??? hehehehe!

It's film, right? :D

I use Polaroids but so far not very succesful.

Mike

ricky_ladia

08-19-2007, 11:04 AM

I always use polaroids on my RB whenever i shoot, too bad it's hard to find polaroids for MedFormats nowadays.:)

It's print, alright, but i'm not sure if there is film inside its case... what i'm sure of is it's not digital!:D

ari_velazco

08-19-2007, 02:03 PM

Guys, count me in on this trip your planning.. No LCDs No Batteries :)

Ari

Derick_Gamboa

08-19-2007, 02:49 PM

After OA#2 Phuleeeeez! :(

http://www.pbase.com/manilaman04/image/69803013/large.jpg

Got my stash, and ready to go!!:Grin::Grin:

Derick_Gamboa

08-19-2007, 02:54 PM

No DSLR's, no CF's ----------------Any film camera!!!!:):):)

http://www.pbase.com/manilaman04/image/84117045/original.jpg

Nino Estrada

08-19-2007, 03:00 PM

After OA#2 Phuleeeeez! :(

http://www.pbase.com/manilaman04/image/69803013/large.jpg

Got my stash, and ready to go!!:Grin::Grin:

haha congrats! why so few? for the 'X' system pa naman:Grin:

Derick_Gamboa

08-19-2007, 03:12 PM

Kodak few........but..........here's the rest!!:D:D:D:D

http://www.pbase.com/manilaman04/image/81305958/original.jpg

Derick_Gamboa

08-19-2007, 03:15 PM

eto pa!!!

http://www.pbase.com/manilaman04/image/84117349/original.jpg

bernard billedo

08-19-2007, 03:19 PM

eto pa!!!

http://www.pbase.com/manilaman04/image/84117349/original.jpg
I'm down to my last shot of Velvia 50. Got any roll to spare? :Grin:

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 04:17 PM

Im game also...heres the film I have :)

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1164/1168735756_b8a8714e42.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1314/1167880373_76d7dc0108.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1413/1167879313_85cbf1b20e.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1439/1168734722_eeae69b93b.jpg

Paeng Bonafe

08-19-2007, 04:49 PM

Im game also...heres the film I have :)

Woah! That's a lot of film Miguel!

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 05:03 PM

1st. I'll have to appolagize for the crap photo! I had to use my cell phone as I have no other digital.

2nd. If its a pissing contest you want............

http://mgdphotography.com/Angie/0819_164658.jpg

this is my 'frozen' selection. 439 rolls at the last stock take.

I can't be bothered to take the stuff out of the fridge as it's all loose!

Mike

Marton_Benitez

08-19-2007, 05:08 PM

I was gonna say Miguel has some sick stock :D but I guess Mike just had more piss!

Damn, that's a LOT of film :D

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 05:09 PM

I was gonna say Miguel has some sick stock :D but I guess Mike just had more piss!

Damn, that's a LOT of film :D

Don't worry Marton, I'm full of Piss! :Grin::Grin:

Mike

Paeng Bonafe

08-19-2007, 05:12 PM

i spoke too soon..

Mike, that's a load.. care to share? :D

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 05:21 PM

i spoke too soon..

Mike, that's a load.. care to share? :D

Sorry, but NO!

Fuji films are a mix of expired and fresh. Fuji YKL are selling off lots of over stock of films and just expired film. I paid 24 peso's a roll for Superia 100 (120) last week. About 4 months out of date. Fuji YKL will order anything you want. The Neopan 400 (135) was 111 peso's a roll, fresh stock. Contact Ariel Tre.... something. (Sorry I can't pronounce it let alone spell it, but he is there marketing manager)

Kodak films are a mix from Cathay Photo, Singapore and local fresh stock. The Ektacolor 160 Pro (120) was bought through JT Photo (Jerome is a mate) directly from Edwin Hermoso at Kodak. This was an overstock sell off. I think I paid 78 peso's a roll. Minimum order was 50 rolls. He had some 500 rolls overstock, should have some left as I only bagged 150! I don't think anybody else bought any.

example, in Yashica Mat 124G

http://www.mgdphotography.com/iblog/images/20070809164131_mat124gektacolor160_aug528.jpg

Mike

Nino Estrada

08-19-2007, 05:23 PM

Derick_Gamboa

08-19-2007, 06:05 PM

@Bernard, sorry I just got 10 rolls.
@Mike, man no wonder you're out of digital...........LOL!:D:D:D:D
@Miguel, .........I can't up the ante with Mike's stock!

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 06:35 PM

Mike - do you have a special freezer just for all that film?? hehe

1st. I'll have to appolagize for the crap photo! I had to use my cell phone as I have no other digital.

2nd. If its a pissing contest you want............

http://mgdphotography.com/Angie/0819_164658.jpg

this is my 'frozen' selection. 439 rolls at the last stock take.

I can't be bothered to take the stuff out of the fridge as it's all loose!

Mike

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 06:37 PM

Derick - I know...thats a lot of film. Well Mike has to feed all his cameras (how many cameras do you have again Mike?? ) :)

@Bernard, sorry I just got 10 rolls.
@Mike, man no wonder you're out of digital...........LOL!:D:D:D:D
@Miguel, .........I can't up the ante with Mike's stock!

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 06:38 PM

Mike - do you have a special freezer just for all that film?? hehe

Not yet! But once the darkroom is built there will be a freezer in ther for film.

Mike (always looking for film bargains!)

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 06:40 PM

Great - hope you can invite us when your darkroom is done :Grin:

Not yet! But once the darkroom is built there will be a freezer in ther for film.

Mike (always looking for film bargains!)

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 06:45 PM

Derick - I know...thats a lot of film. Well Mike has to feed all his cameras (how many cameras do you have again Mike?? ) :)

17 just now but the list is going to grow.

do you want the list..............

ok, your getting it anyhow.

Bronica EC with 50 and 100mm f2.8 Nikkors.
Agfa Super Isolette,
Zeiss Super Ikonta 534/16,
Certo Six,
Balda Super Baldalux,
Seagull TLR,
Yashica mat 124G, (looking for another good one)
Holga
Lomo LC-A,
Voigtlander VF101,
Agfa Selectronic S,
Yashica Electro 35GSN,
Yashica Electro 35CC (x 2)
Canonet QL17 GIII, (looking for a black one)
Rollei 35SE
Olympus Pen EE

Bidding on 7 others on E-Bay!

Mike

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 06:45 PM

@Mike - the guys name in YKL is Ariel Tresvalles - Marketing Services Manager.

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 06:47 PM

Wow great collection. We definitely have to go and see them one of this days :)

17 just now but the list is going to grow.

do you want the list..............

ok, your getting it anyhow.

Bronica EC with 50 and 100mm f2.8 Nikkors.
Agfa Super Isolette,
Zeiss Super Ikonta 534/16,
Certo Six,
Balda Super Baldalux,
Seagull TLR,
Yashica mat 124G, (looking for another good one)
Holga
Lomo LC-A,
Voigtlander VF101,
Agfa Selectronic S,
Yashica Electro 35GSN,
Yashica Electro 35CC (x 2)
Canonet QL17 GIII, (looking for a black one)
Rollei 35SE
Olympus Pen EE

Bidding on 7 others on E-Bay!

Mike

Nat Pagayonan

08-19-2007, 06:55 PM

Sorry, but NO!

Fuji films are a mix of expired and fresh. Fuji YKL are selling off lots of over stock of films and just expired film. I paid 24 peso's a roll for Superia 100 (120) last week. About 4 months out of date. Fuji YKL will order anything you want. The Neopan 400 (135) was 111 peso's a roll, fresh stock. Contact Ariel Tre.... something. (Sorry I can't pronounce it let alone spell it, but he is there marketing manager)

Kodak films are a mix from Cathay Photo, Singapore and local fresh stock. The Ektacolor 160 Pro (120) was bought through JT Photo (Jerome is a mate) directly from Edwin Hermoso at Kodak. This was an overstock sell off. I think I paid 78 peso's a roll. Minimum order was 50 rolls. He had some 500 rolls overstock, should have some left as I only bagged 150! I don't think anybody else bought any.

example, in Yashica Mat 124G

http://www.mgdphotography.com/iblog/images/20070809164131_mat124gektacolor160_aug528.jpg

Mike

photo is one of those film photos i've seen that convinced me that film is still superior to digital....the dynamic range of this photo is very difficult to mimic in digital.

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 07:01 PM

photo is one of those film photos i've seen that convinced me that film is still superior to digital....the dynamic range of this photo is very difficult to mimic in digital.

I agree with you Nat.

On paper a good dSLR will 12 and up mega pixels has the same resolution but not the dynamic range.

It has surprised me just how good even bog standard film can be. Just scanned in 63 images from the Yashica GSN shot on expired YKL film and I was very impressed (bloody amazed actually) withe the colour and range.

Mike

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 07:03 PM

Wow great collection. We definitely have to go and see them one of this days :)

Maybe we could have a party here later in the year. Our Fiesta is at the end of November. Darkroom won't be finished by then but will be under way.

Mike

Marton_Benitez

08-19-2007, 07:19 PM

Wow great collection. We definitely have to go and see them one of this days :)

I agree! :)

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 07:22 PM

Here's one of those images from the cheap YKL 12's that I paid 12 peso's for!

http://mgdphotography.com/Angie/GSNSuperia100_Aug073.jpg

Camera was Yashica Electro 35 GSN, using internal light meter with 6 volt battery.

Mike

nino_carandang

08-19-2007, 08:24 PM

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 08:36 PM

OT: Did you email me already Mike?

NO! sorry........

Too busy playing with my cameras, film!

Don't even have much time these days to play with myself!:Shock:

Mike

nino_carandang

08-19-2007, 08:39 PM

NO! sorry........

Too busy playing with my cameras, film!

Don't even have much time these days to play with myself!:Shock:

Mike

OT: I like your signature my friend. When will you be in Makati?

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 08:47 PM

OT: I like your signature my friend. When will you be in Makati?

I knew you where there despite your offline status!

I'll be in Makati on Tuesday.

Mike

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 09:07 PM

Geez...amazing quality...

Here's one of those images from the cheap YKL 12's that I paid 12 peso's for!

http://mgdphotography.com/Angie/GSNSuperia100_Aug073.jpg

Camera was Yashica Electro 35 GSN, using internal light meter with 6 volt battery.

Mike

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 09:18 PM

Geez...amazing quality...

Scanned at 2400dpi on an Epson 4490 (not quite up to the job!)

Tiff file imported into lightroom, tweak on 'Recovery', 'Black Point' set at 5, slight tweak on 'Clarity'. exported to CS3

Import sharpened with 'Photokit' sharpener, resized for web at 72dpi 650pixels wide. Export sharpened for web. Finished!!

Job done in less than 2 minutes. Much quicker than I could do anything with a CR2 raw file. I processed about 50k CR2's so I also had a familiar routine.

I just find film so much quicker, requires less work to get a decent file.

Next task is to get decent prints................ still waiting for that printer!

Mike

ricky_ladia

08-19-2007, 09:35 PM

Hey Mike, with all those films and cameras... i feel like a noob... geez, i think i don't have to bring a camera nor films on our shoot!:D

Let's make it sooner!!!:)

Jouvet Lee

08-19-2007, 09:50 PM

When will the shoot be? I like to shoot with all of you for a change...

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 09:51 PM

Hey Mike, with all those films and cameras... i feel like a noob... geez, i think i don't have to bring a camera nor films on our shoot!:D

Let's make it sooner!!!:)

The best quote I have seen recently was on RFF today (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/) where the poster said "I'm trying to work on the concept that a camera is a light tight box that I attach a good lens too."

I think that really sums it up.

Buy a nice lens in your desired focal length (mine is 35mm, maybe 28mm) and a decent light tight box to stick your film in!!

A camera is just a tool, its the lens that see's.............

Mike

MikeDougan

08-19-2007, 09:57 PM

When will the shoot be? I like to shoot with all of you for a change...

Jouvet,

no news on when the EB will happen but knowing my work I'll be gone when the great gods Fuji and Kodak agree!

Good to see another enlightened person here who has disposed of there digital gear, so libirating!!

May sweet light forever fall at your feet,

Mike

Jouvet Lee

08-19-2007, 10:20 PM

Indeed it is liberating...

otep_benavides

08-19-2007, 10:30 PM

*gasp* *gasp* *gasp*

neopan neopan neopan

*gasp* *gasp* *gasp*

i'd say you're way off the crazy chart mike :D

1st. I'll have to appolagize for the crap photo! I had to use my cell phone as I have no other digital.

2nd. If its a pissing contest you want............

http://mgdphotography.com/Angie/0819_164658.jpg

this is my 'frozen' selection. 439 rolls at the last stock take.

I can't be bothered to take the stuff out of the fridge as it's all loose!

Mike

Derick_Gamboa

08-19-2007, 10:38 PM

I like this thread. Nothing much to contribute from my end, but HELL a lot to learn!!! I'm still watching you Mike. We'll know the M4 in a couple of weeks. He's from LA. and has 3 sets. if he agrees, I'll link you both. :)

He has had earlier offers from a Japanese who wants to buy the "pristine in box M4."

Jo Avila

08-19-2007, 10:39 PM

Otep is chanting Neopan. I'm chanting Fomapan since I'm awaiting Miguel Vecin to send me over a few rolls :D

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Derick_Gamboa

08-19-2007, 10:46 PM

Mike, so does this mean that i'd get great images if I use great lenses like the LEICA, VOIGTLAND and CARL ZEISS on a tight "digital" box?

This was what I was wondering. Did you skip trying out these lenses on your Digital camera body before this thread?

The best quote I have seen recently was on RFF today (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/) where the poster said "I'm trying to work on the concept that a camera is a light tight box that I attach a good lens too."

I think that really sums it up.

Buy a nice lens in your desired focal length (mine is 35mm, maybe 28mm) and a decent light tight box to stick your film in!!

A camera is just a tool, its the lens that see's.............

Mike

ricky_ladia

08-19-2007, 10:48 PM

Boxed M4?? huwaw!!!

Jo, PM Miguel... he's onlyn wahahahaha!:)

otep_benavides

08-19-2007, 10:51 PM

@jo, the closest i could get to finding b&w film here is kodak t400cn. i haven't scoured the downtown area though :D

my boss is lending me one of his fm2's and one of his f5's.

Jo Avila

08-19-2007, 10:54 PM

@ Ricky

PM? I'm going to send him an SMS :D

@ Otep

Try shooting T400CN at EI 200 instead of ISO 400.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

basil carating

08-19-2007, 11:15 PM

GENTS,

anybody wants to caress a black leica noctilux m 1.0? pm me- white cotton gloves required...

Miguel Vecin

08-19-2007, 11:15 PM

@ jo - im here...hehehe

ill bring iy when i see you thursday :)

otep_benavides

08-19-2007, 11:24 PM

sir basil, will unpowdered latex gloves do? :)

Jo Avila

08-19-2007, 11:29 PM

@ Basil

Post an image of it so that we can all bask in its online presence :D

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Pilar Tuason

08-19-2007, 11:34 PM

GENTS,

anybody wants to caress a black leica noctilux m 1.0? pm me- white cotton gloves required...

I got one of them babies too:Grin: and so far, no one has been allowed to caress her...just me:Grin:

Jo Avila

08-19-2007, 11:36 PM

@ Basil and Pilar

It's like a mistress or a lover. Would you allow anyone else to caress your lover? :D

Cheers!

Jo Avila

basil carating

08-20-2007, 12:02 AM

@ Basil and Pilar

It's like a mistress or a lover. Would you allow anyone else to caress your lover? :D

Cheers!

Jo Avila

AS THE SUPER SALESMAN (DERICK GAMBOA) SAID- "ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE FOR THE RIGHT PRICE". I WANTED JUST TO CARESS HIS LEICA- I ENDED UP BUYING IT!! WELL I GUESS IT REALLY IS TRUE, "THERE'S ONE BORN EVERY MINUTE"

jedllamas

08-20-2007, 06:07 AM

i'm so wary posting a comment here since all the big guns are talking... but i can't help it.. i wanna join the film EB you're planning! wherever it may be! :Grin::Grin:

i'm one of them guys who believe shooting with film is still far more satisfying and more fun than shooting with digital, although digital technology is the rave today. it's just like music CD's and vinyl records. sound is better reproduced on CD's but it's more engaging to listen to vinyls.

i was planning for the longest time to purchase a DSLR but when i went to hidalgo, i end up drooling over manual cameras, especially the old ones. it's amazing how they still function perfectly after 40 years of usage... and sadly, non-usage too. i ended up buying a canonet QL17 and a yashica GSN, and loads of expired films. :Grin:

MikeDougan

08-20-2007, 07:57 AM

MikeDougan

08-20-2007, 08:03 AM

Mike, so does this mean that i'd get great images if I use great lenses like the LEICA, VOIGTLAND and CARL ZEISS on a tight "digital" box?

This was what I was wondering. Did you skip trying out these lenses on your Digital camera body before this thread?

I never tried any of these lenses on a digital body. I do know people who use the 21mm Zeiss Distagon on Canon digital bodies however all manual focus and not so easy unless you put a split prism focus screen into your body.

This lens goes for silly money!

Mike

David Tong

08-20-2007, 03:13 PM

Franz A.D. Morales

08-24-2007, 10:13 AM

Hey, another film user here... just got my Pentax ME Super cleaned and now it's rip roarin' ready to go (it's been 10 years since I last used it due to budget constraints)! Wouldn't trash my digital though, it's still useful for those times when I haven't the money for film... my DSLR is a Pentax too, since I can use my old lenses on it... my only AF lenses are my 2 zooms, all others are prime manuals... I think of my DSLR now as my back-up camera:)

ricky_ladia

08-24-2007, 10:17 AM

My first SLR was a Pentax ME super with a hanimex lens, sadly i thought i was a camera technician so my poor pentax went into a garbage bin. :D

Franz A.D. Morales

08-24-2007, 11:43 AM

@ricky: tsk tsk... almost did the same with mine... good thing I stopped just in time haha... maybe you can sell me your hanimex lens then?:)

jarissmanlapas

11-11-2007, 01:41 PM

TO ALL PRO AND NON-PRO PHOTOGRAPHERS
I’m a senior at St. Scholastica’s Academy of Marikina. Young and determined to enter the world of photography. I have started taking photos and have started maniupalting photos as well. The senior class is currently conducting research on different topics and my group chose to research about DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY. Its nature, advantages and disadvantages.

Please reply to this post with your thoughts on digital photography, why your prefer digital over the traditional usage of film and vice versa, and the like.
Any comment will be appreciated.

Thanks. :]
it would be easier if you could reply straight to my email.
jariss_16@yahoo.com

DondiNolasco

11-11-2007, 05:35 PM

Hi, Jariss

Welcome to DPP!

First of all, let me be frank with you, my dear: "When is your research project due?"

Is it tomorrow or the day after or two days from now? If so, I suggest you are better off Googling or looking up Wikipedia. Also, you can use the Search engine of this forum as there are numerous threads here devoted to digital photography (i.e. digital vs film)

If your class project is still a long way due and you have time to interview people, I think you REALLY need to go out of the house and do it FACE-to-FACE. I mean, do some legwork instead of letting your mouse, keyboard and fingers do the walking and talking.

You will find face to face interviews more fruitful and more importantly, it develops your people skills.

Here are some unsolicited tips:

1) Since your topic digital photography is such a broad field, I suggest you write down a list of questions before you do the actual interview. Nothing irritates a person more than an interviewer who comes unprepared, who has no idea what questions to ask and who expects the interviewee to provide all the answers to questions whether stated or unstated. This way, you don't waste any of your interviewee's precious time....and yours.

2) Use your connections: family, friends, relatives, neighbors. Ask around if they know of any professional photographer (in the studios) or anyone who has photography as a serious hobby.

3) Make an appointment and keep it. Be there ahead of the appointed time. Your interviewee will appreciate you for it. Remember, he is taking precious time off his work/study to accomodate you. Dress appropriately; it will show that you are serious. Be prepared with a notebook and pen; ask the interviewer if he/she is willing to have his words recorded so bring a tape recorder just in case.

4) Remember the simple words: "Good morning" "Thank you" "I appreciate your taking time..." etc. Although not really expected. a small token of appreciation would do wonders in case you need to interview you subject again.

GOOD LUCK!!

MelvinSevilla

11-13-2007, 12:40 PM

Welcome to DPP, Jariss...

I would agree with Dondi. I think you're better of googling the net or spending hours in the library instead of asking a bunch of opinionated hobbyists why Film or digital is much better over the other.

I honestly think that the topic has been discussed to death in most photography forums. I also think that its a topic which I find very little value in discussing. Why? Well, certainly before photography their was painting on canvass. I bet when photography was first introduced, there was a lot of comparison to between photography and painting. But do we even bother to compare oil on canvass is better than my 10megapix camera now? Nope, why? It doesn't make sense anymore. We have found that they are totally different mediums geared for totally different taste and purpose.

In the future (and the internet is like a time capsule), a lot of people will simply laugh at themsevles for taking a very strong stand against/for film/digital in the heydays when it was the 2 mediums often put on a head to head with each other....

Marcos Reyes Lequin

11-13-2007, 12:44 PM

did you try to shoot digital and film? I suggest you should try it as well... and take their advice...

edison.sia

11-13-2007, 11:48 PM

Hello Jarris, welcome to DPP. For me, i prefer digital as you get instant feedback on what you have taken. You can correct your shots instantly.

edison.sia

11-13-2007, 11:50 PM

However, I've been shooting film for the longest time and this teaches you to shoot better instead of just shooting and shooting like there's no tomorrow and choosing only a handful of good photos from the whole lot. You have to be disciplined to shoot film.

Arlino Aoanan

11-26-2007, 02:50 AM

Digital over Film has been an issue ever since digital age came. Here is my tought, Digital is a deveoping technology where as film is an Icon and it's been here for more than 100 yrs maybe. There is nothing comparison from Film and digital is far behind the quality. Why? because 35mm film is far better than the DSLR we all have not to mention medium format or even a 4x4 film. Digital shot are easily twitch making a horrible film can become a master piece so many program even a caveman can do it. But film needs patience time and skill because it will cause you money ( not unless you got your own dark room) if you make mistakes. So there is no room for mistakes in film if you want to save money, or else your pocket will suffer. Professional medium format like Hasselbald, Mamiya, Bronica are still widely use by pros in advertising and modeling field and still using negative and slide films because of the quality of picture. Some of you might know what I am talking and some will agree and some will not. So IMHO for ease of use Digital, Quality of picture Film.

Tristan Peña

11-26-2007, 04:38 AM

I love it when students use forums to have other people do their homework for them. I wish I thought of that during college. ;)

Digital = convenient
Film = cheap

Yun lang naman eh

Arlino Aoanan

11-26-2007, 08:52 AM

I love it when students use forums to have other people do their homework for them. I wish I thought of that during college. ;)

Digital = convenient
Film = cheap

Yun lang naman eh
How cheap is film procssing in Philippines now?

Here digital print is $0.20/print. Film 24 exposure is $5.40

I think film is costly now, not to mention Film rolls vs. reusable memory card.

Think about it.

MelvinSevilla

11-26-2007, 09:03 AM

I love it when students use forums to have other people do their homework for them. I wish I thought of that during college. ;)

Digital = convenient
Film = cheap

Yun lang naman eh

Digital is convenient yes, but film is not cheap.

Initial investment for a digital camera might cost more than film, but in the long run film will be more costly. Imagine:
- A good 36roll negative might be around 55-100pesos (depends)
- A good 36slide is around 200pesos (might be higher depending on where and what you buy)
- Processing is around 55-70 for negatives, around 170php for slides (again, depends where)
- If you want to digitize it, its around 140-200/roll.

I won't mention printing, because its almost the same price for printing for digital and film.

Now, to get you films processed 110/roll. 10rolls = 360shots=1100php. Compare that with a 4gb SD (around 2200) which can also do 360shots, but thats usable for a very long period of time. :)

karlosamson

01-21-2008, 05:27 PM

I agree with you that a dSLR is the latest fashion accessory! try hanging an Agfa Super Isolettete or a Zeiss Sueper Ikonta from your neck and you will soon discover that 1. you can capture better images than most dSLR's and 2. you are the center of attention just by using such a vintage camera!!

Mike

Hi Mike,
Any advice on where I can find Agfa's Rapid film? I recently dug up an old Agfa which uses Rapid but I haven't been able to find anyone selling this. Hope you can point me in the right direction.
Thanks,
Karlo

jerellimayo

01-22-2008, 10:13 PM

hmm.

I used to play with our film SLR from grade school to high school. Its a different experience for me. Part of the fun of analog is the excitement of seeing your shots once developed.

I didn't have to develop my own film (but I bet if I did the fun factor would be even higher).

YES!!!

I totally agree. Digital takes away the fun part in Photography.
Shooting film gives you that intense feeling before pressing the shutter.
You have all the control in the world over the camera. The feeling of advancing the film manually is totally awesome (yeah, you miss that part on a DSLR)
Its just exciting to press the shutter and see a split second blackout, yes, you don't have to look on an LCD for playback. It's really exciting to wait for your rolls to be processed. You have the anticipation, you have the longing desire to see what you have just created. LCD's take away those kind of feelings.

Anyway, Digital has it's own world, it has a different aspect, so there is no really better medium, Film or Digital, each has advantages and disadvantages.

erwinjasonmendoza

01-22-2008, 10:32 PM

YES!!!

I totally agree. Digital takes away the fun part in Photography.
Shooting film gives you that intense feeling before pressing the shutter.
You have all the control in the world over the camera. The feeling of advancing the film manually is totally awesome (yeah, you miss that part on a DSLR)
Its just exciting to press the shutter and see a split second blackout, yes, you don't have to look on an LCD for playback. It's really exciting to wait for your rolls to be processed. You have the anticipation, you have the longing desire to see what you have just created. LCD's take away those kind of feelings.

Anyway, Digital has it's own world, it has a different aspect, so there is no really better medium, Film or Digital, each has advantages and disadvantages.

I share your sentiments guys...one of the reasons why i am still holding on to my dear Nikon F90x! :) with FILM everything has to be perfect before pressing the shutter....and of course the anticipation and excitement never end.

David Guarin

01-25-2008, 09:30 PM

Kodak: Consumers view photography 'less seriously'

"The 'ubiquity' and 'affordability' of digital photography means many consumers are taking photography 'less seriously', states Kodak in a report on the market.

In its 'Kodak Photo Futures Report' the firm adds that many see photography as a 'fun activity' and the fact it is digital - and therefore non-permanent - 'allows mistakes to be deleted painlessly'.

However, Kodak points out that, despite images becoming 'more ephemeral', some observers predict a 'mini-renaissance in the use of 35mm film as a niche of users return to its physical appeal'.

from the Kodak Photo Futures Report .

i've just bought my first film slr a near mint Leica R3 ,it is a joy to use built like a tank it makes my olympus e510 like a toy...

KikoyBalayon

01-25-2008, 09:43 PM

thanks david, i recently bought a manual film body myself.. maybe this "mini-renaissance" is beginning to start.. :D

Enzo Muñoz

01-25-2008, 10:13 PM

Actually, I'm starting to miss film. I'm beginning to think that there's more art in film now that digi is widespread nowadays. Handling a film camera still gives me that unexplainable feeling of.... I dunno, pride maybe.... Maybe, digital is just too instant. I miss the good old days of laboring inside the darkroom, blindly cursing at the developing tank spool for not biting at the film roll and meticulously making test prints to find the proper exposure...
I'm handling my Rebel 2000 more lately than my DSLR. I'm even contemplating on getting a second hand full manual body and a 50mm prime... :)

Arnell Umali

01-25-2008, 10:28 PM

Just a thought.

Maybe the photographer should spend the same level of effort when shooting digital...instead of allowing himself to slack. Would that not result in less and better pictures; and greater pleasure from the process? ;)

donna_lee

01-25-2008, 10:43 PM

KikoyBalayon

01-25-2008, 10:45 PM

I really make sure I do it right, and when I don't, well lesson learned :)

you mean wasted negatives :D

happened to me too..

donna_lee

01-25-2008, 10:57 PM

you mean wasted negatives :D

happened to me too..

oh yeah...I did a test roll on my vivitar uw&s just for checking its threshold for light conditions, you can say the roll didn't survive.

also, I got more OC feeding in film to the av-1 after the unfortunate mishap where I loaded it wrong and when I supposedly finished winding it, I opened the cam and there was the roll half-winded for all to see.

Bah! :)

Enzo Muñoz

01-25-2008, 11:13 PM

you mean wasted negatives :D

happened to me too..

Sometimes the best teacher is an entire roll of clear plastic that's supposed to be your negative... :(
But sometimes I overcompensate by bracketing too much... :D

ari_velazco

01-26-2008, 12:21 AM

I recently found out (today) that there is a small group of people having lessons with 4x5- 8x10 large format cameras...my point, film is still here and there are still people dedicated to the traditional process of taking photographs, developing it and printing it the way it was years before. I bought my DSLR 3 years ago and never upgraded..since then...ive bought more film cameras, started with 35mm, then medium format and recently got a 4x5 LF camera...there is a special place for both film and digital for me..i just shoot more film...:) I feel more rewarded getting it right on film.

jerellimayo

01-26-2008, 10:18 PM

I still own a p&s, so I use my av-1 for some basic slr practice until i get my dslr.

I really love that slr now. Haha, and the thoughts of a dslr is still intact, but in no hurries at all.

The beauty about film is the thrill and the care for each take. When I use the digital cam, I waste a lot of shots, do a lot of tests, in film however, I really make sure I do it right, and when I don't, well lesson learned :)

yeah, I wasted a lot of 4R prints in my first months in learning Photography. Eventually the mistakes I had made me better. A lot of film rolls passed the camera and I was lucky if I was to get 1 good shot in a 36 roll film :)

donna_lee

01-26-2008, 10:56 PM

yeah, I wasted a lot of 4R prints in my first months in learning Photography. Eventually the mistakes I had made me better. A lot of film rolls passed the camera and I was lucky if I was to get 1 good shot in a 36 roll film :)

thats true, i'm just glad you can now have the film scanned and burned into a CD. its still expensive but at least you won't have lots of bad 4R prints ...:)

KikoyBalayon

01-26-2008, 11:31 PM

dang, i just broke my ft2's rewind crank. duh! i forgot to press the rewind button on the baseplate before rewinding.. gotta send this to the repair some soon.. haha.. lessons learned..

dimitriroleda

08-21-2008, 10:49 PM

If you're into photography, please answer my survey http://images.multiply.com/common/smiles/teeth.png

You can check it out here: [link] (http://freeonlinesurveys.com/rendersurvey.asp?sid=83ohjco9zs8ela6474989)

Also, please send this to at least one person you know who's into photography..I need all the help I can get :D

Thanks, and I hope to hear from you soon!

Angelo Mendez

08-22-2008, 12:01 AM

I answered your survey.

chuckoreta

08-22-2008, 12:05 AM

I answered your survey.

Gagayahin kita, Angelo. :D (Trans: You're my idol!)

Angelo Mendez

08-22-2008, 12:09 AM

Gagayahin kita, Angelo. :D (Trans: You're my idol!)

He-he! :Grin:

chuckoreta

08-22-2008, 12:16 AM

He-he! :Grin:

It was quite long ah.

Angelo Mendez

08-22-2008, 12:41 AM

It was quite long ah.

It was short for me, I completely sucked at film cameras!

Marton_Benitez

08-22-2008, 12:54 AM

answered! :)

dimitriroleda

08-22-2008, 01:12 AM

Thanks to all that answered! Keep 'em coming :)

It was quite long ah.

Sorry...But thanks for answering! Really appreciate it..

Tried my best to crunch it down to less than 30 questions kasi 50 yan nung una haha :Grin:

daniel go

08-22-2008, 09:59 AM

Answered :)

levi lacandula

08-22-2008, 10:09 AM

completed the survey =)

dimitriroleda

08-24-2008, 12:02 AM

Thanks to all the people who took the time to take my survey! :Grin:

Keep 'em coming! I need more respondents pa kasi hehehe... :)

Edwin Hermoso

08-24-2008, 11:55 PM

Thanks to all the people who took the time to take my survey! :Grin:

Keep 'em coming! I need more respondents pa kasi hehehe... :)

Dimitri,

Let us know if when you get sufficient sample size : it would be interesting to see what the market has to say about film!

Thanks

Edwin

Jan Michael L. Dayoja

08-25-2008, 12:25 AM

i answered it!

Fherdy Tiongson

08-25-2008, 02:33 AM

Answered!!!
An intersting side for film user.
Let see if still many filn users.

dimitriroleda

08-25-2008, 02:51 PM

Dimitri,

Let us know if when you get sufficient sample size : it would be interesting to see what the market has to say about film!

Thanks

Edwin

As of now, I have 55 respondents...

The problem is now I have to pay the website hosting my survey since I can only see the results for free if I have 50 or less respondents...

I didn't know they had that limit hahaha..But I'll pay them soon, I'll give it until next Friday before I pay 'coz that's when I'll end the survey (most probably).

From what I remember, before I had to pay:

About 10% used their FILM cams more than their DIGITAL cameras.
Of the near 90% who used their DIGITAL cameras more, about 60% use film cameras as well.
People preferred to use their DIGITAL cameras because:
Cheaper in the long run
Instant gratification
Instant information if you did it right/wrong
People preferred to use their FILM cameras because:
More gratifying & thrill because of the wait before you see the pics
Feels more like photography than "snap-shooting"
Deviation from the usualFor numbers 3 & 4, I forgot the exact percentages but majority of what I read espoused the aforementioned.

That's all I remember..This was back when it had about 45 respondents, I think.