film photography, again?!!!!

[gdt]

I have a good Minolta 35mm slr which I'm bringing out of mothballs for a long overdue trial run after many years. Previously when I used this camera I used it in "auto" mode, or the closest thing to that.

Now that digital cameras have taught me manual controls I'm going back to see if I can now "conquer" this vintage camera, just for fun.

Has anyone else done this?

Just curious and input much appreciated.

I'm also wondering if there are ANY advantages to using film slr ?

[mattdm]

I'm also wondering if there are ANY advantages to using film slr ?

Possibly higher dynamic range and also possibly higher resolution -- I've seen people argue back and forth on this until I got tired of reading.

Really, I think the main advantage is: you can play with chemistry in a darkroom.

[cdifoto]

Really, I think the main advantage is: you can play with chemistry in a darkroom.

Screw that; I'm going to Wally-World.

[Nickcanada]

I just blew the dust off of my parents Pentax MF SLR on the weekend. I had a blast. I love the old view finders. I went to a museum and used ISO 800 film. I love the look of the grain, very different than digital noise! I think it changes the "look" of my pictures and forces me to pay more attention to the small details because I'm paying per shot.

Anyway you can see some of my shots here http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27944


Cheers

[gdt]

I just blew the dust off of my parents Pentax MF SLR on the weekend. I had a blast. I love the old view finders. I went to a museum and used ISO 800 film. I love the look of the grain, very different than digital noise! I think it changes the "look" of my pictures and forces me to pay more attention to the small details because I'm paying per shot.

Anyway you can see some of my shots here http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27944


Cheers

I have 800 film in my XG-M. Wish me luck. I'll have to shoot fast shutter speed it I'm outside for sure ;)

:p

[BonjiB]

Film is great. Since I went digital years ago with a kodak dc 3400 i haven't shot much color film since then but my b&w darkroom is still operational. I LOVE shooting black and white film because i can process it myself and play with everything a darkroom has to offer. I like the serenity and calm a couple hours in a darkroom can bring you. I usually use tri-x 400 and push/pull it to where i need it. I find i like the contrast and grain structure pushing tri-x 400 to 1600 gives plus it gives you extra speed. Plus actually spending time in a darkroom REALLY REALLY gives you an appreciation for photoshop. lol. As for the dynamic range argument... i dunno if it's really worth it to shoot film FOR the dynamic range (plenty of other reasons though) when you can double process a raw to gain a very good dynamic range in a couple minutes and save A LOT of money on processing and film.

[Riley]

if you can handle the darkroom bs then film is a good option
it still exhibits better resolution than digital
B&W are still better in film too
you can do processing of neg film in the field

also, if you have a look around ebay, there are some technicly superb cameras going very cheap. the build quality is way better than the fantastic plastics we have now days. if you are absorbed by the retro bug, there are beautiful rangefinders to be had for very little investment

[SpecialK]

Now that digital cameras have taught me manual controls I'm going back to see if I can now "conquer" this vintage camera, just for fun.

Has anyone else done this?

Just curious and input much appreciated.

I'm also wondering if there are ANY advantages to using film slr ?

Have fun. I liked my old darkroom days, but keeping track of negs, slides, proof prints, filing, etc, is one of the reasons I went digital. That, and the cost of film and processing makes digital much more cost effective the more you shoot. I started a thread a while back on the subject.

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27155

Apparently it was not as interesting as I had hoped :-)

[Riley]

many film users now scan their stuff onto pc/mac
use PP in the usual way and print
there are probably 3 main groups still at it i can think of

Leica Users
Rangefinder Users
and Medium Format

seems to me medium format offers some significant gains
and the gear is pretty cheap these days

[DonSchap]

Personally, I find my skin sensitive to several darkroom chemicals, so it's the old rubber gloves if I go back. In a lot of ways, darkroom is just a painfully slow and rather expensive way to get things done, nowadays.

Although I do believe a true photographer needs a good understanding of these rapidly disappearing skills, the real value is defining exactly what you can do with film vs digital. There is a lot to be said for the quality image of a 6x6 negative. One is: twelve shots per roll. Try and live with that during a shoot.

I do believe that film made you a better photographer, because of the prohibitive cost of making mistakes, both in time and money. With digital photography, other than the equipment, where is the penalty for screwing it up? What was that? Another shutter click? :rolleyes:

[Riley]

yes Don
once your chemical toxicity has been reached
you can never lose it
the same has happened to printers and boat builders to name a few

probably best you leave it alone

[Pave]

One is: twelve shots per roll. Try and live with that during a shoot.
Exactly the point. I still remember the holidays some years ago when we had to do with about 100pics when we were 3 weeks backpacking in Scandinavian National Parks. I really regret not having digital then. And also I regret not having the skills I have now (I don't mean I'm a good photographer now but back then I was just a kid and all I could do was aim the camera in approximate direction and press the button)
Which leads me to another thought...


I do believe that film made you a better photographer, because of the prohibitive cost of making mistakes, both in time and money. With digital photography, other than the equipment, where is the penalty for screwing it up? What was that? Another shutter click? :rolleyes:
You've got a point. Once you reach certain level it definitely improves your skills to use film. But on the other hand when you are total n00b it is much harder to start from scratch with film than with digital. The costs of photographs from film could easily discourage most people. Having to pay to see how bad your photographs are is not exatly very encouraging. The posibility to erase the bad pictures with no costs could motivate people to improve their skills by trying. I can tell fom personal experience that when you just keep trying (and erasing the bad pictures) you learn something in the end. :)

[DonSchap]

Exactly the point. I still remember the holidays some years ago when we had to do with about 100pics when we were 3 weeks backpacking in Scandinavian National Parks. I really regret not having digital then. And also I regret not having the skills I have now (I don't mean I'm a good photographer now but back then I was just a kid and all I could do was aim the camera in approximate direction and press the button)
Which leads me to another thought...

You've got a point. Once you reach certain level it definitely improves your skills to use film. But on the other hand when you are total n00b it is much harder to start from scratch with film than with digital. The costs of photographs from film could easily discourage most people. Having to pay to see how bad your photographs are is not exatly very encouraging. The posibility to erase the bad pictures with no costs could motivate people to improve their skills by trying. I can tell fom personal experience that when you just keep trying (and erasing the bad pictures) you learn something in the end.


If it is as simple as push-button erasing the errors, have you really learned anything? Even with my mistakes, there are some things you could appreciate upon examination. I would often watch my paper-printed images develop in the developer and realize issues as the print turned out. Heck, I even kept the test strips for comparison reasons. Sometimes a shift here or there would be noted, but if you toss out all your mistakes ... what do you have to look back on for repeat situations?

I guess that all I am saying is: In the real world, even mistakes have some value. And at the rate I'm going, I'm building a fortune! :D

[Pave]

Yes, I know what you mean...
But what I meant is that digital made the photography a hobby for all people, not just enthusiasts who are willing to pay even for their faults and spend long hours in their dark rooms. These people only took their cameras out when going somewhere for holiday and the pictures consequently didn't look exactly good (I belonged among them so I know what I'm talking about). With the digital they could try and learn by trying (of course it takes more that just pushing the button to learn something but that's not my point) and showing their photographs on the internet and listening to other people's suggestions. In the end it leads somewhere. It won't make you a pro but at least you learn to avoid the worst mistakes. Moreover if you wish even with digital you have the equivalent of dark rooms and all that (with the exception of chemicals) in programs like photoshop etc. Many a fault comes out when you sharpen the picture a bit or adjust the saturation.

And I agree that the mistakes have their value. They teach you and sometimes they make the photo interesting . . . . which means that my photos are interesting to the extreme :D

[mjsneddon]

I too have (some) fond memories of working in my darkroom. I thoroughly enjoyed the time I spent there - most of the time. Maybe it's age setting in, or I have just become lazy; I don't know - but I went to a digital darkroom about three years before I bought my first digital camera. Sometimes I think about resurrecting my B&W darkroom but I seriously doubt that I ever will...maybe when I retire in a few years...

One thing I don't miss....hearing the constant trickle of water from my print washer which seemed to act as a catalyst in my urinary tract!

[sbnr]

I love both mediums, but film has better highlights and less clipping than digital.

Digital has cleaner images, but noise can be a problem at higher ISOs.

I have some pix that my friend took with my Nikon N8008 film SLR....