what film

[gwunwai]

I'd love to be able to do bulk loading, processing and scanning myself one day. Time, there's just so little time and so many things to do.

Anyway, TriX is really flexible, but I've been poisoned by Neopan 1600 lately, but that's just me.

Well, when I first picked up film, I didn't really know how to appreciate the different types of film; I just knew that there is just something in there that you can't totally replicate with digital. After trying around with different film, I now have a better (not good, just better) idea of what each offer in terms of contrast, grain and character.

So my advice to TS is, try to understand what different film offer. A cheap way is to go through the Flickr group for the particular type of film. Or the black and white film groups. Of course, nothing beats trying it yourself, but that's beside the point.

The important thing is know what you like, and which film can offer you that. Some people like high contrast, some people like grain, some people like details. There's a saying that every time you load a new roll of film into your camera, it's a new sensor in there.

If I may dare say, part of the joy of film is to know what type of "sensor" will best tell the story with your camera at that point of time. Go explore and have fun

 

[Royale With Cheese]

Word of advice though, there is a lot of tweeking masters on Flickr that PP quite a fair bit before posting their pictures there.

The outcome might not be the same when you try it.

 

[th1rt3en]

:hammer::hammer::hammer:

what i think he might mean is that pp'ing color FILM photos to b&w is not as good as just shooting b&w film. :angel:

Yes I that's what I meant. My experience and understanding of photography probably pales in comparison to yours as reflected by the post count difference and also forgive my early morning lack of communication skills and I shall refrain form having an opinion when the neurons are half asleep.

Also thanks RWC for bringing up the points that I had been meaning to but was too sleepy to remember.

 

[night86mare]

My experience and understanding of photography probably pales in comparison to yours as reflected by the post count difference

you need to stick around clubsnap more...... then you know that my post count got nothing to do with photography knowledge one. :bsmilie::bsmilie:

 

[Dslrman]

No. I don't need to "tweek" the RGB channels at all. I just bump up the brightness/contrast a little, coz the coloured version is already quite contrasty.

Personally I am not a mono purist, I just shoot and enjoy the outcome (I guess everybody does); be it coloured or b/w, satisfaction is more important for me. Yes I do a little tweeking here and there but then again, who doesn't? The moment you scanned it digitally the colour is not quite the same as the traditional lab developed print copy one. Even if the film developed in the lab using the enlarger, somehow the technician may dodge and burn the effect (PP in a traditional sense?). For me I am doing it a little, in digital, thats all.

Guess its different strokes for different folks

But I do have plans to develop my own film in the future when I go to the next level, just to enjoy different sides of things.

To be honest, do you play with the RGB channels when you convert to B&W in photoshop? I am not a big fan of this process as I think it takes away from the art of shooting B&W but I do know many people who do it this way and I have nothing against how they do things. I think there is a big diff between post processing a colour photo and shooting in black and white, but hey, thats just me.