While brides wanting film do exist, but the vast majority of people out there will not hire a photographer just because they're shooting film let alone medium format let alone something that Jose Villa shoots. If I can stereotype today's bride in today's economy, it's mostly a matter of the best quality for the lowest cost, but cost will completely tramp quality. It's not an overly pretty sight. Yes there are brides that do want film and/or medium format film but it's not a magic pill to make the majority of people spend more. It'll always be about skill and we're simply in a severely bad economy so it is more about price than I've ever seen. Again, this is just a generalization. If you have access to those higher end film seeking brides it may make a difference for you. If you don't, you're wasting money from a business standpoint because most consumers can't see a difference between an uncle bob photo out of a digital rebel or a masterfully composed and executed shot done with medium format film.
The images out of Contax 645 (and medium format in general) are freaking superb compared to 35mm film and 35mm digital but you're only as good as your scans. As for the Contax itself, it's an amazing camera with a few small drawbacks that are mostly ignorable. The lenses are absolutely amazing and was the main reason I chose Contax over the others. I originally was intending to go with newer Mamiya (for the Schneider glass with leaf shutters) when I was deciding but found out they phased out film from their newer cameras
. Even the newer Hassy's aren't film compatible which is IMO completely stupid to close your system even off to that. Especially when it's evident that MF film is making a comeback. How hard would it have been to just allow people to use older film backs on the newer cameras?? The bodies are identical but they've been engineered to close the system of which puts a bad taste in my mouth. I had a few nice emails with Mamiya about film backs but ended up with Contax because I wanted f/2 and f/2.8 lenses with film and the option to do digital. I just wasn't that impressed with any other older mf film system when compared to the Contax.
As for film labs, I still can't find a lab that does consistent quality work and I really wish I could find a cheaper lab that does good scans. Even Richards (which is the best lab I've been using lately) often does so-so work and charge quite a bit. When they're on, they absolutely nail it. But there are techs working there that leave the scanners on full auto and just scan away despite getting different color casts among duplicate negatives. They don't necessarily do color correction and I've had duplicate images come back with one scan spot on and the next scan overly blue despite the image being the exact same on the two negs. I'm also a bit sick of the Fuji Frontier elitism that RPL presents because of Villa and others are inspiring people to over-use them. Everyone thinks that by shooting Contax 645 with Fuji 400h film and scanning on frontier they'll suddenly be in high demand. It's still about skills and while most photographers know who Jose and Jonathan and Elizabeth are, most brides don't. I just dropped some film off from a portrait session I did with some pilots and requested it be scanned on their Noritsu so I'll see how it goes. As for size of images, only you can really know what size you print at and if you want 30-40 inches I'd recommend the large res scans (which are done on the Noritsu). Call the lab up and find out their dimensions. I've been meaning to do a test roll with North Coast Photographic Service as I've heard good things about them. Other than that, while I do feel frustrations with Richards at times, their scans are the best I've encountered.
Film is in a very strange place right now. The new films are phenomenal and are breathing new life into amazing camera systems like Contax and the use of film. The problem is the scanners or an economical and high quality way of digitizing your negs. An amazing image on film is only as technically good as the scanner and the operator. I'm thinking about a scanner right now because shooting medium format is crazy expensive when you take it to most quality labs. Shoot 100 rolls and you've spent upwards of $4000 on average. So why not get you're own scanner? Well, because a good scanner costs a good bit of money. Even a used Frontier can be had for $3500. If you're dealing with weddings you need something that's high volume capable or scanning will take over your life. Nikon is highly praised but stopped making their scanners so they're in demand, hard to get and expensive. Kinda like Contax ;-). There's a new one coming out from Pacific Image called the Primefilm 120 but I haven't heard of anyone who has one yet but it'll be great if it turns out to be a great performer. There are some amazing scanners from other manufacturers like Hassy/Imacon but you'll pay through the nose for it. Anyway, hope this helps and just my opinion.
