Can't go back to 35mm film

[poker_jake]

After using my new 645 for a few days, 35mm just doesn't cut it. Although the D800 is still king but the photos still miss the film look. Might have to look into a 6x7 or 6x9 or make the jump to large with a 4x5.


Pentax091 by Poker_Jake, on Flickr


Pentax093 by Poker_Jake, on Flickr


Pentax084 by Poker_Jake, on Flickr


Pentax065 by Poker_Jake, on Flickr

 

[Sw1tchFX]

Don't expect to get D800 sharpness out of film. Film just isn't really "sharp" like digital is, regardless of the format. 4x5 might have about the resolving power of a D800, but it still has grain, whereas a D800 doesn't. :/

Also, real B&W film doesn't scan super awesome and usually looks uber flat. Color filters help a little bit, but if your main intent is scanning, look into shooting XP2 or BW400CN. Much better films for scanning.

 

[IanG]

Try using LF as well and then you realise 35mm isn't worth the effort.

B&W films scan extremely well and there's a quality that's missing with digital capture, I quite like my Gigabyte sized scans from 10x8 negs, very sharp and great tones.

Ian

 

[amolitor]

Don't expect to get D800 sharpness out of film. Film just isn't really "sharp" like digital is, regardless of the format.

What does this mean?

 

[The_Traveler]

This is worship of a process rather than a result.

 

[Light Guru]

Try using LF as well and then you realise 35mm isn't worth the effort.

EXACTLY

 

[Tiller]

This is worship of a process rather than a result.

No different than people owning vintage cars or anything else.

 

[timor]

This is worship of a process rather than a result.

And what ? Here is a base question: HOW do you measure "results" in photography ? In any case, I think that NOW we have a freedom of what or whom we love.

 

[The_Traveler]

To me, worshiping a process only makes some sense if you get some personal pleasure or satisfaction out of it and the product is really irrelevant - like whittling.

What doesn't make sense to me is saying the product, or some small part of it, is amazing just because of how it was made.

 

[peter27]

To me, worshiping a process only makes some sense if you get some personal pleasure or satisfaction out of it and the product is really irrelevant - like whittling.

What doesn't make sense to me is saying the product, or some small part of it, is amazing just because of how it was made.

So you would argue that eating at a restaurant listed in the Michelin Guide is no different to filling up at a fast food joint, would you? After all, the result is the same: you go in hungry and came out with a full stomach.

 

[amolitor]

To me, worshiping a process only makes some sense if you get some personal pleasure or satisfaction out of it and the product is really irrelevant - like whittling.

What doesn't make sense to me is saying the product, or some small part of it, is amazing just because of how it was made.

So you would argue that eating at a restaurant listed in the Michelin Guide is no different to filling up at a fast food joint, would you? After all, the result is the same: you go in hungry and came out with a full stomach.

Talk about completely missing the point. I'd try to clarify things, but a) I don't see how to make Lew's point and clearer and b) I am pretty this is devolving into simply picking sides based on what we think the other guy said, without actually reading.

 

[The_Traveler]

To me, worshiping a process only makes some sense if you get some personal pleasure or satisfaction out of it and the product is really irrelevant - like whittling.

What doesn't make sense to me is saying the product, or some small part of it, is amazing just because of how it was made.

So you would argue that eating at a restaurant listed in the Michelin Guide is no different to filling up at a fast food joint, would you? After all, the result is the same: you go in hungry and came out with a full stomach.

No, I wouldn't argue that because , in that situation, the process is the end point.

If I were starving and my end point would be getting more calories and fat for my dollar, then a fast food restaurant would be better.

In photography, AFAIC, the end point is, or should be, the final image.

 

[Ilovemycam]

I was thinking of going to 35mm for a Widelux shooting only. But I just hate everything about film other than 'the look.'

 

[Tiller]

No, I wouldn't argue that because , in that situation, the process is the end point.

If I were starving and my end point would be getting more calories and fat for my dollar, then a fast food restaurant would be better.

In photography, AFAIC, the end point is, or should be, the final image.

Some people do like the way film looks better.

Both sides have good points. But why does it really matter?

 

[terri]

OP, those are lovely images, especially the ones of the waterfall! You are having the same reaction I did once I picked up 645 - once you get accustomed to handling larger negatives, being able to see more information on the light table and especially the joy of enlarging, it's really hard to go back to 35mm. Those negatives look awfully small.

Have fun! Keep posting your results.