Yet another photographer looking at switching to film

[JG_Coleman]

I understand what you're saying, don beach, but I still just don't get it.

I suppose there are still some good reasons to use film... but "enabling a photographer to take deliberate, quality photographs" just isn't one of them. At the end of the day, I just don't understand why you would resort to slower, more cumbersome, more expensive-to-develop technology just to compensate for a lack of discipline on your own part. Don't get back to basics with your equipment... get back to basics with your craftsmanship and your discipline... and you'll fix problems of sloppiness or laziness without purchasing a single new piece of gear.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

Why was going to be my question. Your further explanation confirms that you have no reason to go to film. The problem is within yourself, not with the camera;

Mind you, I love film and real prints and will shoot it for my art projects but there is no way in hell I would shoot anything but digital for commercial/retail work.

 

[don beach]

thank you, everyone. i'm listening to what you say. perhaps it's a the winter blues and after moving to another part of the country, we are having to start over and i'm struggling with everything. i'm out of my comfort zone with a new market, but the irony is that i wanted to leave that market anyway. things are slow, and i read something on a photographer going back to film the other day... and thought it might give me a fresh perspective and direction.

 

[Mike_E]

Hi Don, what you said in your second post on this thread is why I suggest you go ahead and get back into film. Not the part about slowing down but the part about Black and White and the experience of the old Glamor style photography (not to be confused with the modern bastardization of the term which stretches it to cover -no pun intended- nudes).

Digital does not approach analog when you're talking about B&W I don't care which Photo Shop plugin you care to name. The gradients, real grain and tonalities are sometimes imitated but are usually mocked by digital.

Also, people have always been willing to pay for craftsmanship. By providing an experience which is an event from the lighting right down to the film camera from a bygone era, rather than a passport photo-shoot, you will find a market. The question becomes whether or not it's a big enough market to suit you.

Even though the prices are creeping up these days film cameras are still cheap. Get one and see what you think. Of course you are expected to do your own due diligence on the market in your area but i think that you might be pleasantly surprised.

 

[don beach]

thanks, mike! i have a photographer friend who is going to give me his F2 and some manual focus lenses to experiment with (and so i can reaquaint myself with film and it's workflow). we are going to be changing our whole photography bizz around, and everything is on the table right now. i'm also a wedding officiant, and we sold our north carolina business when we moved to RI, so we'll have several sources of income while we make some choices for photography in a very saturated market. as for the glamor style market in studio, i think we have a shot at a niche market in this area. most of what we've seen has been more softbox type stuff, and the old style might not please many contest judges, but it's so unique and dramatic. and utilizing film might just be the artistic capper!

At least we won't starve while we work it out! i appreciate your comments and advise! don

 

[Mike_E]

Not a problem.

You might look to the theater (community or summer stock) for models when you're getting set up. They are usually happy to oblige (especially when they get prints) and shooting them in the 40's style should be right up their ally.

 

[timor]

Mike_E; thumbs-up, I share same view.
Don, You have no idea how much of the stuff is still available in B&W. Adox is restarting production of APX (Agfa), Ilford is marketing new type of fibre based artistic paper - ART 300. Well, they see some market, looks, like people still appreciate hand made silver gelatine print. If You think of using the camera commercialy go for hassie or 4x5. Good luck.

 

[christopher walrath]

If you are going film, go for the Full Monty. Processing, Printing. The most expensive piece of gear in your darkroom (read: I use the downstairs half privy) is going to be the enlarger. Everything else can be rounded up on the cheap.

But do it for the right reasons. If you're doing this for something new then go for it. If you're doing this to fix a problem, changing gears (or gear, rather) can be very expensive for a whim. I would love to welcome another analog photographer to the ranks. But I want you do it for the right reasons.

 

[don beach]

thanks, everybody! things are firming up around here... i had a long conversation with a interesting person who taught photography for 40 years... he recommended the Rollie 2.8 TLR, or perhaps the Mamiya TLRs to stay in my price range, and this should give the look I'm after. (and he's owned every piece of photography equipment there is from the sound of it). i mentioned the suggestions that some had made here, and he covered the ups and downsides from his experiences with various kinds of gear. we found some cool old furniture items locally, and our background stands arrived today. so now it's studio setup time! i'll still be doing digital, but film will now be part of our bizz, and i'm getting excited.

And it's going to be warm enough tomorrow to ride the harley around the ocean drive! what a country!

 

[djacobox372]

Hasselblads are 6x6.

True, the old manual focus ones were, but the new autofocus hassy's are 6x4.5.

 

[altitude604]

i too have been looking at picking up a medium format system... the desire to get out into some of the more remote parts of Labrador with an MF setup and do some landscape work is ovewhelming.

anyone recommend an MF body that wouldn't be horribly inconvenient to pack into a bag and take onboard a small turboprop and into the woods? (i'm not a bazillionaire so a used RB67, ETRS or a brand-new overhauled ARAX Kiev-60MLU/SE seem to be in the forefront.)

 

[raphaelaaron]

I suppose there are still some good reasons to use film... but "enabling a photographer to take deliberate, quality photographs" just isn't one of them.

LOL GOOD ONE, JG. :lmao:

 

[Josh66]

I suppose there are still some good reasons to use film... but "enabling a photographer to take deliberate, quality photographs" just isn't one of them.

LOL GOOD ONE, JG. :lmao:

What's funny about that? If you are unable to take deliberate, quality photographs with digital equipment, I don't see how using film will magically change that.

Do you think people only started taking 'crappy snapshots' when digital came out?

 

[Mike_E]

i too have been looking at picking up a medium format system... the desire to get out into some of the more remote parts of Labrador with an MF setup and do some landscape work is ovewhelming.

anyone recommend an MF body that wouldn't be horribly inconvenient to pack into a bag and take onboard a small turboprop and into the woods? (i'm not a bazillionaire so a used RB67, ETRS or a brand-new overhauled ARAX Kiev-60MLU/SE seem to be in the forefront.)

Look to the RB 67s, they're tank tough and hold up well to most abuse.

 

[marvinh]

Don Beach - you can also look at this way: digital should force you to expose properly and this in itself should give you a good discipline. As you know, with digital you must expose properly or risk blowing out the highlights. With film that usually wasn't a problem. So take your time. Compose your image as you would with film and figure your exposure with hand held ligth meter if you want. Oh, and balance your lighting with the sun, etc, etc.

MarvinH