Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Is there a definite move back to film by many???  (Read 19638 times)

tho_mas

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1798
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #60 on: February 27, 2009, 04:51:40 PM »

Quote from: Plekto
the Sony looks a bit CGI/animated - too smooth in a way.
because the captured scene itself is already printed...
« Last Edit: February 27, 2009, 04:51:59 PM by tho_mas »
Logged

ndevlin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 675
    • Follow me on Twitter
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #61 on: March 01, 2009, 09:28:13 AM »

[quote name='Plekto' date='Feb 27 2009, 10:21 PM' post='263454']
http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic_ektar100.htm
A bit sobering, really.  Velvia 100(and I suppose 50) come close to the Sony, but the rest are worlds worse in terms of grain and noise.    


This article, as much as it shows how good film can be when brought into a digital workflow with the best equipment and experienced hands, actually re-proves that life is too short for scanning film!!!

I would rather play with my home colonoscopy kit all night than f*** around with one of these miserable, flawed, glitch-prone, costly, hair-tearing machines known as film scanners.

If my financial resources were endless, I would have every shot I wanted to see in print professionally scanned.  Sadly, that makes a p65+ look cheap  

- N.
Logged
Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera        www.nickdevlin.com

Chris_Brown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 902
  • Smile dammit!
    • Chris Brown Photography
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #62 on: March 01, 2009, 10:48:06 AM »

Quote from: KLaban
. . .the medium is not the message.
I agree, but the workflow definitely affects the results.

My epiphany occurred when I shot a large still life job about five years ago. The layouts were very specific in terms of final size and placement of elements in each scene (to allow for text & gutters). Using the capture software I was able to use the AD's digital comps as overlays to get exact placement of all the elements in each shot. Everything when faster with more precision. Un-retouched, actual-sized proofs were printed out at beer o'clock and everyone was satisfied (and slightly buzzed).

The other aspect of digital capture is knowing exact RGB values within a few seconds of capture. No more Polaroid "estimating". Lights can be manipulated to get exact tonal values within the scene. The level of precision of exposure is much greater with digital capture tools than with analog tools.

This is old news to digital junkies, but every time I shot film I found myself fighting the workflow when trying to get precise results.
Logged
~ CB

epatsellis

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 55
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #63 on: March 01, 2009, 10:59:29 AM »

Quote from: Chris_Brown
I agree, but the workflow definitely affects the results.

My epiphany occurred when I shot a large still life job about five years ago. The layouts were very specific in terms of final size and placement of elements in each scene (to allow for text & gutters). Using the capture software I was able to use the AD's digital comps as overlays to get exact placement of all the elements in each shot. Everything when faster with more precision. Un-retouched, actual-sized proofs were printed out at beer o'clock and everyone was satisfied (and slightly buzzed).

The other aspect of digital capture is knowing exact RGB values within a few seconds of capture. No more Polaroid "estimating". Lights can be manipulated to get exact tonal values within the scene. The level of precision of exposure is much greater with digital capture tools than with analog tools.

This is old news to digital junkies, but every time I shot film I found myself fighting the workflow when trying to get precise results.
Chris,
I do alot of this type of work, though I just print out the layout on overhead transparency flim and tape it to the ground glass. (one of the advantages of a scan back and 4x5). One of the biggest advantages of often doing the graphic design as well is also being the AD, I know exactly what I want to shoot, and know how to do it. For years I've been promoting the concept of a design firm with an in-house studio, much the same as what I did 20+ years ago. In the right location, it can work wonders, if you can find one or two talented people to work with.

where in Central IL are you located?

erie
Logged

Chris_Brown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 902
  • Smile dammit!
    • Chris Brown Photography
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #64 on: March 01, 2009, 07:52:17 PM »

Quote from: epatsellis
. . . just print out the layout on overhead transparency flim and tape it to the ground glass.
yeah, I did this for as long as I had my Sinars and it works, but not to the precision that digital capture provides.

Quote
where in Central IL are you located?
In the flat, windy part.  
Logged
~ CB

free1000

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 426
    • http://www.foliobook.mobi
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #65 on: March 02, 2009, 12:17:58 PM »

Please give me back my Type 55.

But don't take away my Aptus 75.

I'd hate to give up digital for my commercial work.

But I'd love to have my favorite film back.


...

Once you have Alien Skin Exposure hooked up as a final step in a well crafted Lightroom Exposure... what's the difference?  I have the films I want most of the time.  Generally I do a final render using the Kodachrome 200 look.

Also. People do too much retouching, working the files too much makes them look artificial.

I used to have to drive an hour to a lab to process my 4x5's. Set the A run, go and not-drink for an hour and a half, review the A's, run the B's and then pick up and drive an hour home.  Digital meant I could live in the country and not the city. Result.
Logged
@foliobook
Foliobook professional photography folio for iPad
www.foliobook.mobi

Larry_Menzin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #66 on: March 04, 2009, 01:36:59 PM »

I'm a landscape shooter doing both film and digital. Since it's been a big snow year in New England, I've shot quite a few snowscapes.

My P20 is used primarily on an Arca Swiss 6x9 with typical landscape movements, including stitching with a KG sliding back.

Even using LCC in Capture One, there is pretty serious casting on bright snow. It is difficult and time-consuming to correct it and get both halves of my stitched frame to color match.

It seems that when I head out to shoot snow scenes, I'm mostly taking my 8x10 Arca and Provia/Velvia sheet film. Results are outstanding.

YMMV.

Larry


Quote from: uaiomex
I'm with you Anders. Film is different. Vive la difference!
Eduardo
Logged

sperera

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 97
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #67 on: March 06, 2009, 03:27:17 AM »

......I have bought a 2nd hand Sinar F2 with a Schenider 150mm and am ordering my all time fave T-Max 100 film to start and shoot a personal project I'll be doing.....for commercial work...digital.....but to make me feel like I'm doing something worthwhile.....its 5 x 4 for me.
Logged
Stephen Perera
www.ulookfierce.com

sperera

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 97
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #68 on: April 07, 2009, 05:59:01 PM »

...add to that a Rolleflex T Black with prism and 75mm Zeiss lens.....bargain!

....and I quote www.thiaps.com

Kodak is lately as well reporting positive figures in film-and film related sales. A 40% increase solely  with 4x5 films, as an example, was rumoured around in the ample halls of Photokina.

But even smaller producers and vendors were mostly starting to smile, when I asked what they think about their analogue products in future. Foma is doing obviously very well, with films and especially with papers. ADOX and Freestyle are not anymore only niche-sellers but more and more real big players in the game.
Aside the Agfa-substitute in PE, already in production and a baryta-version, available in early spring, ADOX was presenting a brand new baryta paper, with ADOX-specification made by Ilford. From the same manufacturer, but a completely different paper, is sold by Bergger. Though, Ilford obviously believes that the market is again big enough to even manufacture the products of its competitors.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2009, 06:00:45 PM by sperera »
Logged
Stephen Perera
www.ulookfierce.com

Professional

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 309
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #69 on: April 07, 2009, 08:56:19 PM »

Interesting, i am thinking to try or use film now as i never used it [if talking about 35mm or MF, not cheapo or instant or Polaroid which i used once in the past], really not sure after 10 digital cameras it is a right decision to try film now, i still remember i met a landscape Photographer in UK [Scotland] in 2007, he was using film cameras [Pentax when i was with him that day, and he has Contax as well], still confusing if i should do, in my area there is no sign of using film, maybe only 5% are using film in my country but with digital cameras beside.
Logged

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #70 on: April 07, 2009, 09:02:17 PM »

Quote from: Larry_Menzin
I'm a landscape shooter doing both film and digital. Since it's been a big snow year in New England, I've shot quite a few snowscapes.

My P20 is used primarily on an Arca Swiss 6x9 with typical landscape movements, including stitching with a KG sliding back.

Even using LCC in Capture One, there is pretty serious casting on bright snow. It is difficult and time-consuming to correct it and get both halves of my stitched frame to color match.

It seems that when I head out to shoot snow scenes, I'm mostly taking my 8x10 Arca and Provia/Velvia sheet film. Results are outstanding.

YMMV.

Larry

Hmmm. Generally the LCC completely eliminates such casts.

Have you tried using the easy gray profile? That can help if there is residual cast. Just a thought.


Snook

  • Guest
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #71 on: April 07, 2009, 09:55:22 PM »

Yeh I am using film again and I drop it off at the Lab with my Horse and Buggy, Sold the Car too...
Next week I am buying an AirBrush machine so I can retouch the prints as well.... Screw Adobe!!
I feel good things are coming. My clients were just complaining about how fast it was to go from shoot to printed  campaign and they said. Take a couple of extra days with getting us those contact sheet....Mean time are competitor will have the Ads on the street while we look at the contact sheets with a loupe.
I also invested in some Wax pencils for marking the contact sheets....
Feels like the good old times.
Snook

Logged

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #72 on: April 07, 2009, 10:30:02 PM »

Quote from: Snook
Yeh I am using film again and I drop it off at the Lab with my Horse and Buggy, Sold the Car too...
Next week I am buying an AirBrush machine so I can retouch the prints as well.... Screw Adobe!!
I feel good things are coming. My clients were just complaining about how fast it was to go from shoot to printed  campaign and they said. Take a couple of extra days with getting us those contact sheet....Mean time are competitor will have the Ads on the street while we look at the contact sheets with a loupe.
I also invested in some Wax pencils for marking the contact sheets....
Feels like the good old times.
Snook

I shot a catalogue on Provia 100F.  300 rolls total.  Had the chromes back in two hours after a clip test, cut and sleeved, at the end of each day. Went to the client's production office and made selects on a light box, sent chromes to be scanned fpo.  I wanted to shoot digital because film scares the shit out of me for commercial, non-repeatable, on location work.  It was a weeks shoot.  We worked together to produce the look for retouching all working on a few machines in the clients' studio.  Once we settled on the look, the selects were drum scanned and sent to the in house retoucher who followed the recipe for color grading, etc.  Car service, no horse and buggy.  Just as fast, really, as with digital.  Less retouching.  Proofs were delivered faster and I wasn't smoking meth and espresso to stay up until dawn applying looks to 5000 digital files, selecting, editing, and uploading to ftp, then starting all over against for day two, then day three, then day four.

It was nerve wracking, not like an arty editorial where if the film is bad I can work around it, shoot three different film and digital cameras, etc.
Logged

danlo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #73 on: April 10, 2009, 06:29:53 AM »

I just got 30 rolls of Fuji Reala  So my Hasselblad is going to work his ass of this spring
Logged

E_Edwards

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #74 on: April 10, 2009, 07:08:10 AM »

I used to shoot everything in 8x10 tranny. Still have the Sinar 8x10 and the 8x10 Polaroid processor, nice prints they were!  

Then everybody started to shoot 4x5 only because it was easier and cheaper to drum scan. We would do all the retouching and then output back to transparency film, as the printing houses would not work with digital files.

I wouldn't touch film now, for product photography at least, digital is infinitely better, faster, betetr quality, lets you experiment, lets you push your ideas, gives you peace of mind.

I would absolutely loath going back to film. To those who look back with nostalgia, wake up, you are getting old, we have never had it better and the opportunities to make money with photography have never been better.

Edward
Logged

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #75 on: April 10, 2009, 10:27:25 AM »

Quote from: E_Edwards
I used to shoot everything in 8x10 tranny. Still have the Sinar 8x10 and the 8x10 Polaroid processor, nice prints they were!  

Then everybody started to shoot 4x5 only because it was easier and cheaper to drum scan. We would do all the retouching and then output back to transparency film, as the printing houses would not work with digital files.

I wouldn't touch film now, for product photography at least, digital is infinitely better, faster, betetr quality, lets you experiment, lets you push your ideas, gives you peace of mind.

I would absolutely loath going back to film. To those who look back with nostalgia, wake up, you are getting old, we have never had it better and the opportunities to make money with photography have never been better.

Edward

For some applictions digital is so superior to film, especially something technical like products, beauty and arch. where previews for lighting the set/composition, movements and clean files are paramount.  This is where a back and a tech camera shine.  But for fashion, portraits, etc, well, film and its workflow can be better than a digital.
Logged

photodan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 64
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #76 on: April 10, 2009, 03:31:25 PM »

I prefer the look of film (6x7 medium format and larger - especially 4x5 & 8x10), but switched to digital for practical reasons (it's harder to find good labs to process film and make analog prints, and it gets more expensive as time goes on, and I don't really need the movements a view camera provides for most of my photos).

Fotoman camera is going out of business, sad to say, but it illustrates the overall continuing decline of film-based photography. However I think there will be a continuing small or niche market for film - the new 6x7 folding camera from Japan is coming out, and the continuing use of  amateur and pro use of 4x5 cameras for landscapes, and larger film formats for B&W  alternatives processes.

For architecture and table top uses I would guess most pros find it cheaper to spend a bundle on a view camera with digital back solution, as they can write off the cost of their equipment against their revenue. We poor amateurs that want that kind of image quality need to still use large format film.

Stitching images with a small format digital camera is an option for objects that don't move (and for subjects for which depth-of-field can do w/o view camera movements), but I've found stitching to be pain. I guess I'm just impatient & lazy and/or set in my old fashioned single-shot ways  :-)
Logged

epatsellis

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 55
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #77 on: April 10, 2009, 04:51:41 PM »

Quote from: photodan
...
For architecture and table top uses I would guess most pros find it cheaper to spend a bundle on a view camera with digital back solution, as they can write off the cost of their equipment against their revenue. We poor amateurs that want that kind of image quality need to still use large format film.
...

Well, you have to make the money first, or have a banker willing to loan the money, not very likely these days unless you're spotless, creditwise. For now, I'll stick with my Phase One Studiokit scan back, does all I need, and it's paid for. With clients squeezing every penny they can, raising prices isn't an option. In fact some of my clients have considered shooting in house, though we all know how that usually ends up. The one that did still uses me for about 80% of their work, it seems that having the ability to light a set effectively(full sized roooms of furniture) isn't an easy thing to find in your average employee.

erie
Logged

BlueLemon

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #78 on: April 17, 2009, 07:09:22 PM »

I work in a school of photography - and we are still working analogue. We crave for the old techniques like Bromoil, Van Dyke, Cyanotype and have extensive use of liquid emulsion - but how do we do in a digital age.

Well for myself, I tend to believe that there are pictures I would never make digitally for this very reason : The feel or touch in picture.

Analogue will have a "Retro-period" - and here we are keeping it alive..... well we try to :-)

But having said that - I work privately too with digital DSLR and Digital back - and some pictures cannot be made with analogue - for a different reason : TIME

I see photography is all about choosing my tool when I have my mind set on a scene - whether to go analogue or digital. I simply won´t surrender my analogue equipment, and here are a few answers why I don´t ever surrender

Jamin Darlot lens Equal of the one of Julia Margaret Cameron used for her most famous portraits
Darlot Vis a´Paysage Lens - one of the first with cone ;-)
Lerebours et Secretan Lens - gorgeous bokeh and swirley effects on nature
Verito Soft focus portrait lens with studio shutter
Kodak Soft Focus Portrait lens - Sally Mann uses this I´ve been told - and a lens construction and result comparable with the famous Cooke 945 - no digital lens will ever come close

And these are just some of the lenses that I use - and these create something that nothing digital will ever produce.

I also use film like Polaroid type 55 over almost any digital back, I crave for using the new Rollei ATP 1.1 rollfilm like I crave to use my newest purchase a Hasselblad 503CW with a 120 CFE Macro attached with a Phase One P25 digital back.....

Well - i see these cameras and lenses as technical tools - and on EVERY single job og photoshoot, I pick my choice.

The world is not all digital - yet ;-)

You may totally disagree with me, and I will understand and respect your point of view, but here in this "Camp" both Lerebours, Type 55 and old wooden cameras have a function along with Potasum Dicromat ;-)
Claus Stensgaard
« Last Edit: April 17, 2009, 07:13:26 PM by BlueLemon »
Logged

Plekto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 551
Is there a definite move back to film by many???
« Reply #79 on: April 18, 2009, 04:07:13 AM »

I was going to reply about this but you also brought it up briefly.  That is, the effect of psychology on a media.   As any technology gets to the point where it matures and is thoroughly understood (at least from a technical POV), as well as is widely used, it ceases to be fun and interesting and "new" to many.

It becomes a commodity.   A good example is computers.  In the old days, computers were DIY affairs and the haven of scientists, geeks, and technological types looking to push the limits and have fun.  But as they got better and better, about 4-5 years ago they suddenly became appliances.   Very complex, very maintainance-intensive appliances.   It wasn't fun, it wasn't easy - it was plainly put, a chore.

This is an intolerable state for the human mind - it honestly hates grinding and thinking just to get stuff done.  Simplicity and functionality become more and more the goal, so there's a swing back to simpler methods.  You see this in cooking - from the stupidly fancy cookbooks and shows of the 90s to a shift back to simpler food.  You see it in the recent interest in low-impact and natural housing.  You saw it in watches - digital was the rage in the 80s and 90s and now it's swung back.  You see it even in technology itself.  It's why the Wii sells so well.  

DSLRs amaze me but at the same time I still opt for the simplicity of my old Rollei.  4-5 things to remember, all analog and "fuzzy logic" type controls.  Dials to grasp, knobs to nudge... it's simple and intuitive.  So then you concentrate on the shot alone, or close to it.  

And when you get it back, it's OK or it's great - you judge and live with it.  No tweaking for hours to get it to look "right" - You take your chances, learn to trust yourself, and move on.  The time that people now spend at their computers is amazing, really.

Edit - that said, I also love my DSLR, but most of the time I'm just not in the mood to deal with it.  Though, it does work fantastic for trips and family photos and the like.  Point - shoot - done.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2009, 04:17:48 AM by Plekto »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up