Film SLR dying.... sad...

[Halfmoon]

Dinosaur.... Dive....

Your point are true... should just enjoy photography.. these are the passing of the format... as it was before....

I started with mannual focus Konica rangefinder, pretty auto in some ways... dunno how many years since.... then, I tried out my uncle Minolta SLR... mannual with manual metering.... fun... and interesting.... I do like to do full mannual mode too... even now.....

I do not know if film will out last digital in storage, but I do hope that film will not die off... since 35mm is a format I have been using for a long time..... some emotions attached with it....

I have some 10+ yrs films, which was processed and color did not come off too badly... not as vivid.... maybe becos I kept everything in the same place, it is easier to find both flim and pic??

Just hope that film SLR will not become extinct... and the 35mm film...

I think the film company can actually make a film SLR body once every 7-8 yrs...... and keep it in production......... not possible I guess since they will likely to maximise production for digital body and use every resources...

Another reason for my dislike of digital.... I am not so tech savy.... PC is slow, and not upgrade since a few donkey years.... and memory is less than 15GB... and if switch to digital, a whole lot of investment..... CF cards, etc....

Ultimately, it is still sad to see 35mm film SLR dying.....

 

[student]

"What I don't do - alter reality"

What wonderful honesty!

Really refreshinng!

But then, are my eyes deceiving me? What did I read?

"I made my church friend 10 years younger when he got married last year"

Oh! I got it!

Yes, life must go on. Even with relative honesty in a church wedding.

Que sera sera.

 

[diediealsomustdive]

If one wants to pick bones, then all the techniques like burn in, dodging, multiple exposure etc are all altering reality, as is use of filters, like soft focus, star burst, etc. Minor tweaking of reality, increase contrast, minor removal of wrinkles, are all considered not altering reality. In the days of film, touching up is also done, albeit not by "students" but by professionals. In photoshop circle, boosting saturation without it being obvious is also accepted as not altering reality.

Honestly, if you have taken wedding photography, you would have done some of these, even posing in a more flaterring manner is altering reality, going by your definition.

Of course if you think that absolute honesty is the only way to go then I think you can go the way you wish. Remember the main point - quit whinning and keep shooting.

Altering reality - putting a storm where there isn't one, putting Madonna next to you in your class photo, and any number of things are altering reality. Moving clouds from one shot to another is altering reality.

Not to start a flaming war, but the word church probably has contributed a lot to your reaction. Remember I was only stating my point of view about film vs digital by digging on my experience from years gone by, and even a relative dinasour like me had embraced digital. And my definition of what constitute altering reality. You are the one coming out with the sarcasm.

Quit whinning - that's the key message, keep shooting, that's the point, not whether little thing I did constitute altering reality. If film is your thing, do it, if not do digital, or polaroid for that matter. If you want to alter reality, go ahead, if you don't fine with me.

Quit being sarcastic.

Que sera sera.

 

[diediealsomustdive]

Your point are true... should just enjoy photography.. these are the passing of the format... as it was before....

Thanks for seeing the point...

I think the film company can actually make a film SLR body once every 7-8 yrs...... and keep it in production......... not possible I guess since they will likely to maximise production for digital body and use every resources...

That probably can be called wishful thinking.

Another reason for my dislike of digital.... I am not so tech savy.... PC is slow, and not upgrade since a few donkey years.... and memory is less than 15GB... and if switch to digital, a whole lot of investment..... CF cards, etc....

Man (woman?) if a dinasour like me can take up digital, so can you! Got to read a few books and get a reasonably fast computer with lots of RAMS.

Ultimately, it is still sad to see 35mm film SLR dying.....

That unfortunately will happen, a matter of time.

But you know what you can do? Buy a few backup bodies secondhand, dirt cheap these days, load up and shoot. Until you can't get film no more. And then you can buy your film in China, shoot them and send to China for processing, until they too stop processing film.

But, keeping to the point, keep shooting.... digital or otherwise... these days I even shot with my Nokia N70....

Good day guys (gals).

 

[Halfmoon]

But you know what you can do? Buy a few backup bodies secondhand, dirt cheap these days, load up and shoot. Until you can't get film no more. And then you can buy your film in China, shoot them and send to China for processing, until they too stop processing film.

I just got another film body, and now, 3 bodies.. and should last me for another while before film dies off.... did thought of getting a EOS 1V too....

I do not know how much longer film will last but while it last, I will salvage every moent and enjoy it!

If I am cam maker, I will kill film SLR to force people to take up DSLR too, and that's how the money will come in...

That's why they say... invest in lenses, not body perhaps???

Digital need to have a fast pc, and lots of rams... softwares, etc... Me... lazy to learn perhaps, but cost of investment will be big... I am a VERY VERY late adopter kind of individual, and not keen to pay premium prices..... will do it steps by steps.....

 

[diediealsomustdive]

Good for you on your body count.

My inventory?

Film SLRs all Nikons: F, FT2, EL2, FE2, FG, F70 (all in near perfect working conditions - but cosmetically from 5 to 8). Cover all the eras of SLR dominance from Nikon F. Was tempted to pickup F2, F4 and F5 recently in the forum, but now have other priorities (see my Call Sign and you'll know what). Hey if i want to shoot film I can have BW, slide, colour film, different ISO, different lenses, all in one go. My shoulder will break, along with my back. Man I even have a scanner that can do film scanning...

But I gave up film.

DSLR: D70.

DP&S: Canon's G2, A40, S60, S70.

Lenses: too many to enumerate, from 10-20 Sigma to 400 Tokina (incidentally these are the only 2 3rd party lenses). All nikon for the rest, like 20/3.5, 28/2.8, 50/1.4, 50/2, 85/1.8, 105/2.5, etc. Few AF, even fewer AFD, and the lone DX kit lens. Some even non-Ai, 2 of them converted.

Dinasour.

You are quite right, lenses would be the way to go.

I enjoyed film shooting. Did much work and back in days when film is such mystique to people. You know, the "wow you can get such good pictures!". Today almost all idiots can get perfect exposure.

But where the mustard is cut, is in the composition, choice of aperture/shutter speed, use of filters, angle of view, working with your subject, posing your subject (assuming you are shooting people), etc. Oh, and f/5.6 and be there (or was it f/8 and be there?). BE THERE and not slouching somewhere in front of a computer or TV.

So it is harder to impress people with photography now than before. You need to be really good in the art aspects. Afterall, so many people can pick up a D50 (or F55 for that matter), put on a longist lens (like 85mm), select the "face of a girl" mode, and come away with the shallow depth-of-field effect.

Of course none of those PhD (press here dummy) kind will buy a 85mm f/1.8 or 85mm f/1.4. In this department, a dedicated photographer may still win, but by not much. Get the hint? Buy buy buy super lenses. Dump those kit lenses. Get those with huge front element, f/2.8 is the slowest you should go (kidding).

Having said that, digital helped me much with my underwater photography venture. Back in the days of Nikonos V, I shot 3 to 5 rolls, come back, process them. Damn this damn that. No records of what I did, and 5 days of diving with load of instruments, I quickly forget what I did. Next dive trip (some months or even a year later), same mistakes again. Never progress beyond beginner. In fact I shot 1 roll out of focus, misread the scale (thought it was feet and it was meter).

Then came digital. Instant feedback. **** something wrong. Quick think about it, exposure compensation? Need to zoom in a bit? Maybe flash should be cut down (flash compensation), etc. Man, this is what they call progress.

And thinking about photography while trying to maintain bouyancy, keeping in tap where my buddy is, monitoring my depth, monitoring how long I have been down there, how much air I have left, minding the current, and a thousand other things in an alien environment (like ouch where did that fire coral come from?), is really tough without instant feedback.

Still only an advanced amateur, though.

Silly hobby, but boy it is satisfying when the results come out.

Film, DSLR or tiny PnS, or otherwise.

Keep shooting. Live long and (does not prosper due to lots of money gone into photography).

 

[Halfmoon]

Good for you on your body count.

I think 3 is enough... not sure the future, so think I will invest in a 85mm f1.8... I notice I prefer to play with primes more nowadays....

I enjoyed film shooting. Did much work and back in days when film is such mystique to people. You know, the "wow you can get such good pictures!". Today almost all idiots can get perfect exposure.

I suppose the REAL test should be when everything was still using manual metering, and have to control both the shutter and aperature.... The ULTIMATE TEST now!!! hahaha... I think I should be ok with that... since I shot with Minotla manual SLR before... if I can still remember... haha.. now, most people will just shoot P or full auto I suppose...

So it is harder to impress people with photography now than before. You need to be really good in the art aspects. Afterall, so many people can pick up a D50 (or F55 for that matter), put on a longist lens (like 85mm), select the "face of a girl" mode, and come away with the shallow depth-of-field effect.

Everything now is make easy for dummy to use mah.. seriously.... I think it is just too easy for getting good shots... SLR is like PnS at times too.... set it to full auto.. you have it...

Of course none of those PhD (press here dummy) kind will buy a 85mm f/1.8 or 85mm f/1.4. In this department, a dedicated photographer may still win, but by not much. Get the hint? Buy buy buy super lenses. Dump those kit lenses. Get those with huge front element, f/2.8 is the slowest you should go (kidding).

I do not believe in expensive lens... I believe more in the power of an image to tell a story more.. the emotion, and expression.... That said, I will try to buy within budget and reasonable lens for my hobby and use....

Your diving phots sound interetsing... too bad I am not a good swimer and this is out for me....

Keep shooting. Live long and (does not prosper due to lots of money gone into photography).

If you die with the money, someone else prosper... so might as well make full use and BBB... hahaha....... :bsmilie:

 

[diediealsomustdive]

Halfmoon ...

I like your attitude.

Think you can go very far in this (silly) hobby. Ok it is serious hobby, even business to some. For me it is almost like logging memories. Days of doing it for the sake of doing it, getting that effect, ect, are almost long gone.

Keep shooting...

 

[Halfmoon]

Halfmoon ...

I like your attitude.

Think you can go very far in this (silly) hobby. Ok it is serious hobby, even business to some. For me it is almost like logging memories. Days of doing it for the sake of doing it, getting that effect, ect, are almost long gone.

Keep shooting...

My attitude? Some people think I have an attitude problem... hahaha... Go how far????

Aiya... just enjoy shooting lor... a bit sad nowadays not so much time to shoot.... My new target is to shoot a roll a month now... Hope I can keep that up....

I not keen to be sucked into the business aspect in some ways when you do business, you will kill the interest... some what.... I shot wedding and events before.... it is no joke doing that as a living.... your interest will be killed by it I think.. You will be doing what they want and not what you love....

I now also look into picking up second hands stuffs.... stretching my dollars....

I try to UP my technique by "monkey see, monkey do" style.... I think it help in some ways... only thing I have not tried, and really love to is star trails... with Bulb exposure... Also, I do reading and seeing pictures and copy.......

With Digital, just create any effect you like to perfection.... photoshop it... no more fun with multi exposure, etc... something I think is more challenging if you do on film....

Just enjoy.... especially the dying 135mm format... :cry:

 

[leeter]

Shoot more Film hehee, i only got a film SLR to play with, and i feel it's really cool

 

[ZHISIANG]

Shoot more Film hehee, i only got a film SLR to play with, and i feel it's really cool

Ya agree!!

I still have not switch to Digital SLR yet though I’ve gone into digital photography already. I only have a digital point-and-shoot (DPNS) camera. I like the convenience of DPNS, just snap whatever I like, don’t need to worry about the film. But when come to serious photography, I still use convention film SLR. The previous wedding photo I’ve taken for my friend, I borrowed a DSLR and along with my own film SLR, when I compare them side by side, wa! The film ones is so much shaper and clearer….

I also don’t like the 1.6 times conversion of the DSLR lens, my 28mm f2.8 only become 44.8mm standard Lens in DSLR body, what a waste… so I’ll never buy a normal DSLR, if I want to buy I’ll buy the 1:1 top range DSLR…. But too bad, its so expansive, I rather use the $$ to buy more L lens….

 

[Kimura_papaya]

before you guy switch into DSLR, perhaps you should read what kenrockwell comment about DSLR.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm

to someone who very fussy about image quality and pricing of camera...perhaps you should really spent sometime have a serious reading about this article.:think:

kimura

 

[diediealsomustdive]

The kenrockwell piece is pretty well written, but in reality few of us will ever have the opportunity or the finances to get our stuff customed printed or scanned with high res drum scanner.

I had struggled through many years of 35mm film negative and positive processing. Nothing really works very well, and they were expensive. Slides are good, only for projecting. Printing via Cibachrome is out of reach for me mostly. Slide could never be printed accurately or nicely, on a budget. Negatives are almost never accurately printed. Worse still, frequently mishandled, from exhausted developing solution (gives a brown cast) to scratched negative.

So one of those things I did was to scan in the film I used in the last years when I did film work, and used photoshop to tweak for contrast, do colour correction, dust removal, etc, and yes what kenrockwell said is true, even with a in-his-words-cheapo epson flat bed. The hybrid prints (film negative scanned, tweak slightly, colour corrected) were superior to the photo print from the same negative. And the hybrid prints were also superior to the pure digital prints from DSLR.

But the hassle...

I perhaps covered 100-200 wedding in my younger days using film. Covered only 1 wedding using DSLR (my friends should all have been married before the digital revolution, but there are the few die-hard bachelors who finally succumbed more recently). And that last wedding was a real budget event, no studio shots. I turned up in the morning, do the usual, bundled them up to Labrador Park, shot for 2 hours before letting them go back to the tea ceremony. After the tea ceremony and before church wedding, I had 2 hours. In that 2 hours, I picked 2 nice photos, did minor tweaking, print out, pulled out 2 frames from my stock, mounted and frame them, along with some 4R shots printed using the same printer.

Talk about instant gratification... Didn't tell anyone I was doing this and the couple were pleasantly surprised.

Is film superior, definitely.

Is it more fun to play, no doubt about it.

But digital is instant, give it 2 hours and you can have something on the table. If only I had an A3 printer it would have been even more impressive.

Having said that,
1) Photoshop is to enhance an already good shot. Unless you are a real freak, the most one should do is to adjust levels, curves to enhance contrast, and selectively dodge or burn in certain areas, remove wrinkles without losing reality, and (this I learn from a pro) add a bit of black in the neutrals (this boost the contrast).
2) Shots that are bad and need to be rescued by photoshop - hit the delete button.
3) Used within limits, digital is good enough for me.
4) Will I shot film again, maybe. Just yesterday I read about the star trail and now thinking about it. May bring a electro-mechanical camera to shot start trail when I next go diving. And I may also bring out my 69 model Nikon F to shot just for fun. Boy the last time I did that it attracted attentions, and photos were good (a bit weak in the colour, maybe the lens coating then was not as good, but every bit as sharp as my more recent AF50/1.4)
5) Will I buy more film cameras? Yes. I want to collect some of the older Nikon SLRs, like F2, and hopefully some rf - like the Nikon SP.

But I will do the bulk of my shooting in digital, dSLR and dPnS.

 

[Kimura_papaya]

The kenrockwell piece is pretty well written, but in reality few of us will ever have the opportunity or the finances to get our stuff customed printed or scanned with high res drum scanner.

I had struggled through many years of 35mm film negative and positive processing. Nothing really works very well, and they were expensive. Slides are good, only for projecting. Printing via Cibachrome is out of reach for me mostly. Slide could never be printed accurately or nicely, on a budget. Negatives are almost never accurately printed. Worse still, frequently mishandled, from exhausted developing solution (gives a brown cast) to scratched negative.

So one of those things I did was to scan in the film I used in the last years when I did film work, and used photoshop to tweak for contrast, do colour correction, dust removal, etc, and yes what kenrockwell said is true, even with a in-his-words-cheapo epson flat bed. The hybrid prints (film negative scanned, tweak slightly, colour corrected) were superior to the photo print from the same negative. And the hybrid prints were also superior to the pure digital prints from DSLR.

But the hassle...

I perhaps covered 100-200 wedding in my younger days using film. Covered only 1 wedding using DSLR (my friends should all have been married before the digital revolution, but there are the few die-hard bachelors who finally succumbed more recently). And that last wedding was a real budget event, no studio shots. I turned up in the morning, do the usual, bundled them up to Labrador Park, shot for 2 hours before letting them go back to the tea ceremony. After the tea ceremony and before church wedding, I had 2 hours. In that 2 hours, I picked 2 nice photos, did minor tweaking, print out, pulled out 2 frames from my stock, mounted and frame them, along with some 4R shots printed using the same printer.

Talk about instant gratification... Didn't tell anyone I was doing this and the couple were pleasantly surprised.

Is film superior, definitely.

Is it more fun to play, no doubt about it.

But digital is instant, give it 2 hours and you can have something on the table. If only I had an A3 printer it would have been even more impressive.

Having said that,
1) Photoshop is to enhance an already good shot. Unless you are a real freak, the most one should do is to adjust levels, curves to enhance contrast, and selectively dodge or burn in certain areas, remove wrinkles without losing reality, and (this I learn from a pro) add a bit of black in the neutrals (this boost the contrast).
2) Shots that are bad and need to be rescued by photoshop - hit the delete button.
3) Used within limits, digital is good enough for me.
4) Will I shot film again, maybe. Just yesterday I read about the star trail and now thinking about it. May bring a electro-mechanical camera to shot start trail when I next go diving. And I may also bring out my 69 model Nikon F to shot just for fun. Boy the last time I did that it attracted attentions, and photos were good (a bit weak in the colour, maybe the lens coating then was not as good, but every bit as sharp as my more recent AF50/1.4)
5) Will I buy more film cameras? Yes. I want to collect some of the older Nikon SLRs, like F2, and hopefully some rf - like the Nikon SP.

But I will do the bulk of my shooting in digital, dSLR and dPnS.

if u worry about processing cost...i suggest u don print out all...even negative also can be scanned.

normally i bring back to johor side, look for a reliable fujifilm shop, they will get my film developed for RM5, addional RM3 for CD burning..so all together only RM8..i don even have to print all copy out ...unless there are need then i will get it print out.

printing on fuji quality paper for film only cost me few 10 cents only..since i know the shop well now.

so we won have to worry so much about financing a lot.

 

[Halfmoon]

Shoot more Film hehee, i only got a film SLR to play with, and i feel it's really cool

It is cool!!

 

[Andy Ang]

Slide wins Digital. Anytime. Period.

 

[Ah_Seng]

*sigh*.......i'm more concern abt how i can be better.........not whether digital or film is better........shoot more and learn to let go lah..........

 

[diediealsomustdive]

normally i bring back to johor side, look for a reliable fujifilm shop, they will get my film developed for RM5, addional RM3 for CD burning..so all together only RM8..i don even have to print all copy out ...unless there are need then i will get it print out.

Watch out for scans from "fuji" shop (or for that matter kodak, konica, whatever shop). I believe the scan they do are of low resolution! Good for 4R, maybe 5R.

Check the file size on your CD and report back (tell us about the resolution scanned at, if known, otherwise filesize would do). If you shop does high or even medium res scanning - give me the name, I want to bring my stack of negs to have them all scanned. If they are good for 8R I am contented. My neg scans on my epson comes out about 17MB (tiff) or about 5MB (jpg) each pop. Have a small bank of HDD sitting on my shelve. Always worry about them crashing (2 copies on HDD, 1 on DVD-R, another on CD-R).

Andy.... no doubt about slide beats digital. Just this old bone of mine prefers convenience and "control" (i.e. can do all what I used to do in a stinky dark room in the comfort of my room and control of photoshop, and I can do something now and come back next week to continue, sigh those long hours in a dark, stuffy, stinky dark room, and oh, only black and white).

Ah Seng ... that's the spirit! Be the best that you can be.

Zhisiang ... I faced the same situation, my 20mm wow wide angle becomes 30 mm (on my Nikon) and I lost metering. My 20mm was from years ago, Ai lens. No choice, had to move on, drool on a 12-24 Nikon DX lens, eventually settled on Sigma 10-20. Now I am shooting wider than before.

 

[Snoweagle]

Agree that slides beats digital hands down.

 

[Andy Ang]

Andy.... no doubt about slide beats digital. Just this old bone of mine prefers convenience and "control" (i.e. can do all what I used to do in a stinky dark room in the comfort of my room and control of photoshop, and I can do something now and come back next week to continue, sigh those long hours in a dark, stuffy, stinky dark room, and oh, only black and white).

No worries, I agreed too. That's why I am shooting both digital & film. (Even with my Cameraphone, cos its convenient to upload). :bsmilie: