NC(T?)D.....No Gibson; No Guitar Content.

[Hoya]

Im old and I just can't convince myself to like digital just something about Analog film thats hard to beat I guess it's like a tube amp???

 

I agree! There's something about the grain in film (especially B/W) that makes it special.

[retrosurfer1959]

yeah I should have said that 90% or better of the photos I take on film are black and white out of the other 8% is probably color slide and that last 2% is probably color negative. And the digital film back is 50 megapixel and the large size of 120 film so it puts most other digital camera's to shame and I still don't like digital for art photographs. It's likely just my age since I began my photography career in 1977 and in 1979 i was at the Brooks institute in Santa Barbara taking classes in Photography and film. Ad yep I have a darkroom of my own so that makes using film a lot less difficult since I don't need to send it to a lab just go ito my darkroom.

[milod]

Kinda funny here - not really "ha ha," though.

 

I think the use of various sorts of camera gear is pretty similar to the different sorts of guitars and gear "we" use, keep or get rid of as we grow.

 

I've a batch of film cameras, including a nice medium format camera with a power winder and pentaprism I haven't needed in roughly 20 years. Good camera, good glass, etc., and it shot about 50 magazine covers.

 

But my daily need for it is zero.

 

I shoot and "think" everything in color because I have about a 50 percent chance that anything I shoot will end up in color.

 

The larger the format and film quality does allow, in theory at least, a far greater bit of detail. Black and white photography emphasizes light and dark and the grays between and thus emphasizing composition and lighting; color brings the "contrast" into the range of color differences not seen in a panchromatic film and in ways a different set of skills.

 

Most of my photography is not "art" by most definitions, although I've won some photojournalism awards - but I question the awards in one sense because one then wonders whether the awards were made because the photo tells the story or simply adds an illustration that has a degree of "art" to it but isn't really part of the story one is telling.

 

So... anyway, for the time I'll stick with my midrange Nikon, a flash and PhotoShop. No way I'd return to film as long as I'm doing what I'm doing now every day. I have no idea what I'd consider were I to return to a 150-line screen magazine cover type of work.

 

m

[retrosurfer1959]

Totally agree Milod (as usual) i'm usually doing true art prints for framing or taking pictures of jewelry pieces for high end art books so I am looking for a different type of photo. and My way isn't very portable honestly and it's very expensive the Back alone is like buying a small car and I or shows and I usually shoot tethered to a computer to capture the images in Raw for greatest flexibility in post production. I can barely type so journalism is never going to be a need for me, but the level of detail and resolution I need is high enough the the medium format is almost mandatory some shoot in the small digital formats but the printers aren't usually very happy.

[pippy]

Nice snap of the C/M with the Rolleiflex, Retro!

Did you do the reverse-angle as well and take a picture of the Hassel using the Rollei?

 

 

....and please excuse my nosiness but is that a 12-on (as opposed to an A-12) back she's sporting?

I remember back in the day I decided to count how many half-turns it took to get the '1' to appear in the viewing port. It saved a lot of my time...

 

P.

[milod]

Got to thinking...

 

Is that a Rollei in the viewfinder? Without a pentaprism that was great fun framing sports. (Not.)

 

I used one in the mid '60s.

 

BTW, my first larger color photo in print was from a Speed Graphic - 2.25" x 3.25, whatever that comes out to in cm. Can't recall what film.

 

It was a cover photo for a tabloid-size cookbook that filled the whole cover. <grin> circa 1972.

 

m

[pippy]

Is that a Rollei in the viewfinder? Without a pentaprism that was great fun framing sports. (Not.)...

LOL!

 

Trying to pan a Formula 1 car with a TLR?.......

 

Tried it once......

 

P.

[pippy]

Just for fun I found an ancient (1982?) snap of me with my M-2.

All non-moveable parts were covered with black electricians' isolation tape (I'm 100% serious) in an effort to render the camera less obtrusive.

There is so much I could say about this snap...but I won't.

Image was shot by a mate with his 5x4 MPP baseboard camera. His shutter-times were longer than I anticipated.....

 

 

 

P.

[4Hayden]

I know it's a bit tangential but I also know there are a few forumites who enjoy their photography so for those of us 'in the mood' here's a quick iPhone snap (apologies for the poor quality!) of my 'new' second-hand tool-of-the-trade;

 

 

M-8.2 with (new) Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 Nokton and accoutrements.

 

For the uninitiated it's like receiving your dream Gibson Re-issue - whatever model it may be.

I'm a Very Happy Bunny.

 

P.

Looks good pippy Enjoy

[capmaster]

Sorry, Pippy, for me joining in here so late.

 

Congrats on your acquisition, I'm sure you did right and do so feeling happy. Being a passionated amateur photographer for 47 years, I understand your decision in a holistic manner, from a rational and an emotional standpoint as well.

 

Honestly, I believe there's not much in life I ever was or ever will be able to do to the degree of still picture photography. For economical reasons I always did it using gear on a budget. Therefore I know how hard dealing with limitations of equipment can be.

 

The following may sound like blasphemy here but enlighten the context: If I had the money to spend on either a fine real 1959 Les Paul or extraordinary fine photographic equipment, nobody would ever hear a difference when I play the coveted guitar, but a handful of pictures I took would do for revealing a vast improvement.

 

Therefore, from my very own point of view, I completely understand your ambitions, let alone in a professional context.

 

Technically flawless pictures are my minimum requirement, albeit within the limits of gear and film material or sensor. As long as I used cameras with fully manual operation, my technical wastage was well below three percent at any time over the years – impossible with any automatic functions, in particular focusing which also makes real snapshots difficult due to shutter delay. 28 years I didn't even care for exposure metering and nicely estimated shutter speeds and apertures - until 1996 my father gave me a new, obligatorily automatic camera as a gift after my son, his first and only grandson, was born. He also lived to see my daughter, his first granddaughter, and passed away before another two granddaughters of him were born by my sister.

 

On the other hand, to my feel perhaps one percent of the pictures I took are of any interest as such beyond cold usefulness for documentation or personal memorability.

 

I dare posting two of these here, hoping there won't appear problems due to personal rights of the persons on one of them.

 

Camera: Rollei 35 SE, HFT Sonnar 40mm/2.8 lens, and for the first one Metz Mecablitz 32 BCT 1 electronic flash.

Film: Kodacolor Gold 200 - 135 film. Scanned from ca. 10 x 15 cm² photos. Film (well, all in all lots of films...) processed and prints made by a 2 hour service in downtown Calgary on Tuesday, 1st September 1993.

 

 

Confusion At YYC In 1993: After arrival in the evening of Friday, the 13th August 1993 at Calgary International Airport, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Own work. Crazy blind shot with the camera held up high.

 

 

 

Lake Louise, Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada, In 1993: In the morning of Saturday, the 14th August 1993, with Mount Victoria (Bow Range, Canadian Rockies), Alberta/British Columbia (boundary following continental divide) and Victoria Glacier, Alberta, Canada, in the background

Own work. Weird contrast range due to deep hanging clouds in the middle ground, hiding Fairview Mountain to the left and the higher mountain forest to the right.