Holga, Brownies, Pinhole and any other kind of Lo-Fi

[timor]

Isn't that a little like saying once you take the negatives out of the canister then instant - or moreso, out of the envelope from the lab?

Is this how you did in your film era ? Shortcuts ?

I don't feel a significant difference in process between processing b/w and digital aside from how it's manually done.

To bad for you. But then millions feel that way. The same with the fish...

 

[unpopular]

The issue isn't digital v. film. As with film you can process it yourself and pat yourself on the back because you got your hands wet. Digital isn't any different. You can just shove a file through a raw processor, only using it to correct mistakes and pat yourself on the back because you "shoot raw".

In my experience, shooting and processing film isn't that different from shooting and processing digital, and digital feels more like b/w to me than E6 or C41. This isn't due to that I just process my film and dry my hands with a big satisfied smile, nor do I just push a raw file through the processor like it's a minilab.

You should know by now how I feel about SOOC.

 

[limr]

The issue isn't digital v. film. As with film you can process it yourself and pat yourself on the back because you got your hands wet. Digital isn't any different. You can just shove a file through a raw processor, only using it to correct mistakes and pat yourself on the back because you "shoot raw".

In my experience, shooting and processing film isn't that different from shooting and processing digital, and digital feels more like b/w to me than E6 or C41. This isn't due to that I just process my film and dry my hands with a big satisfied smile, nor do I just push a raw file through the processor like it's a minilab.

You should know by now how I feel about SOOC.

And in my experience, shooting digital is very very different from shooting film, and not nearly as fun. You seem to be using "pat on the back" or "satisfied smile" in a derogatory way, which just seems silly to me, but whatever.

 

[timor]

The difference is total. Photography deals with real, physical objects in process, digital with only an information about how physical objects would behave in producing the final image, but not in final product. In one word digital is virtual, photography is real. Behavior of digital camera is similar to camera loaded with colour transparency film which is, what is mimicking by it, but shooting and processing b&w film is very much different.
It maybe only is the image, what counts, but I don't think so.

 

[jcdeboever]

The difference for me, being a noob... With most film camera's, I tend to stop and think more about the whole process. Additionally, I like the sounds, the feel, and wonderment of what I captured.

I think I like my Pentax K1000 the best, it just simply takes good exposures as long as that needle is in the middle. I like that I can + or - shutter or apeture and as long as that needle goes in the middle, exposure is correct. My Holgas are for fun and always amazed at the results and quirks.

With digital, I tend to sabotage myself with all the menus, settings, and I get confused. I am really not that happy with my D3300 because it is so complicated to use, actually contemplating selling it.

I can develop my own film but I sent out the last rolls to Dwayne's because frankly, I could care less. I also sold my scanner sometime ago to someone that was going to put it to good use. I think if I had it still, I would develop the B&W.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[unpopular]

I do mean it in a derogatory way if you're just developing film like baking a cake from a box.

 

[timor]

I do mean it in a derogatory way if you're just developing film like baking a cake from a box.

What do you mean by that ?

 

[unpopular]

What I mean is if you're just following the development time charts, then you're no better off than using a minilab. It's just like processing a raw file exactly how it would have come out if it were shot in JPEG. There's no point.

Any more it sounds super impressive to develop your own film. But if you're processing everything at normal development time without using the zone system, you're not really *doing* anything more substantial than washing your hands. You're not contributing anything to the process.

 

[unpopular]

The difference is total. Photography deals with real, physical objects in process, digital with only an information about how physical objects would behave in producing the final image, but not in final product

This is a difference in visceral "feeling" of things. At it's abstract core, I feel there is more similarity than difference.

And no. Of course I am not one to say "in the end only the image counts", absolutely no. But I think once one stops getting wrapped up with the differences, there are more similarities than differences.

Admitting, printing is another matter, and photo printing feels more like prepress than photography.

But exposure and processing feels the same to me once I got over the fact that film isn't involved.

 

[unpopular]

(I've never liked printing digital, for one more than four color printers that RIP in RGB offer virtually no direct control and given their color system's complexity I find them extremely unpredictable)

 

[timor]

What I mean is if you're just following the development time charts, then you're no better off than using a minilab. It's just like processing a raw file exactly how it would have come out if it were shot in JPEG. There's no point.

Any more it sounds super impressive to develop your own film. But if you're processing everything at normal development time without using the zone system, you're not really *doing* anything more substantial than washing your hands. You're not contributing anything to the process.

Agree with that.

 

[timor]

The difference is total. Photography deals with real, physical objects in process, digital with only an information about how physical objects would behave in producing the final image, but not in final product

This is a difference in visceral "feeling" of things. At it's abstract core, I feel there is more similarity than difference.

Well said, but I would extend this to the whole art. If art exists and is not only the product of our imagination formed by our education. More education and this abstract core becomes more and more complicated.
I don't "disqualify" digital form, just think, it is so different from film. It started as computerized mimic of film, but grew much beyond that in it's ways and still is not done with it. The opposite.

 

[timor]

It seems, that I found some fix for my problem with Imperial Reflex ability to scratch the film by removing some material from the film path. Couple of days ago I had some sun so I shot a roll. Not a scratch.

This picture is shot on HP5 with orange filter. Not very happy with the outcome. Comparing to TMY-2 HP5 can't get the same contrast ratio. Well, the lens on that camera is a joke so lack of contrast is no surprise. I think I will have to find different processing routine with HP5. On the other hand processed like that HP5 is grainless.
To compare to TMY-2 and demonstrate how bad scratches could be with this plastic camera older picture:

Problem was, that the scratches were totally random. No matter, how much I polished the plastic somewhere always some dirt was caught with bad effect.

 

[timor]

Link to post created by Smithdan about converting Brownie Holiday to 35mm film.
Take Your Holiday on a Holiday
Nice job, man !

 

[smithdan]

From the converted Brownie Holiday..
FP4, Y2 filter , D76 stock.

Rangeland

Moving the Rig

Schoolhouse

Hangar 4