1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why I take pix

Discussion in 'Introductions...' started by beelzebomb, Apr 26, 2011.

  1. beelzebomb

    beelzebomb Member

    Hi, this is my first post on here, & just a brief introduction then; I studied photography at Loughton/Fairmead Art College in the 80's (along with Alan Davies & one of Turin Brakes!) & have been taking pix more seriously since the 90's. I prefer the silence & peace of landscapes rather than people - also almost guaranteed stress-free!

    These days I am a professional web designer & writer.

    In an age where technology grabs the headlines, & people clamour for the latest thing, I still shoot slide film, I don't think it's been bettered yet & the cameras are just crazy cheap these days. Bur forget the tech' for a bit, to me it's the magic of the moment that I love, I've tried to sum it up here & maybe it'll inspire..

  2. Atavar

    Atavar Well-Known Member

    Hi, welcome aboard :) Great to see someone still running film stock, there are still a few of 'em about on here. Check out the 'Everything Film' forum near the bottom of the forum main page :)


    Not as busy as i'm assured it once was, but its still there which is refreshing when every other photography magazine seems to be geared to digital only.
  3. beelzebomb

    beelzebomb Member

    Thanks for the reply. Yes I was amazed the other day to take in some slide film for processing to a photography specialist who advised me to go to Boots as they no longer processed film.

    I could (just about) see the irony in Boots continuing to carry out a service that is now, possibly, just a bastion of serious snappers rather than holiday makers!
  4. Atavar

    Atavar Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Apr 26, 2011
  5. beelzebomb

    beelzebomb Member

    Thanks, that's interesting - but scary, too. I've added a reply there as it seemed more appropriate than on this thread.

    Seems to me that in the modern world of "now now now" the human race jumped to digital far to quickly (wasn't even full-frame for goodness sake!) simply because we have no patience anymore - no-one can bare to wait 4 days (or even 2 hours) to get their prints developed. All instant gratification. And as for the argument for free pics, ok, but how much did you pay for your inferior-for-the-price camera which, like early Bluray, will be near obsolete in a year's time?!

    Says more about human-kind than we realise I think.
  6. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Your argument had some currency 10 years ago, but makes no sense now, I'm afraid.

    Anyway, welcome aboard, and long may you continue to enjoy taking pics whichever way you wish.
  7. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    As Nick says this may have been a little more relevant a decade ago but today I think it doesn't entirely hold water.

    All instant gratification? Possibly for the snap happy happy-snapper but then you could argue that many of them weren't prepared to wait for even the 24hr service but had to go for the 1hr hope-that-they-stopped-and-fixed-everything-properly option. Can't blame digital for that but I do agree that the pace of modern life has gotten faster than some (many?, most?) of us would really like.

    On the other hand if you are serious about photography then there's nothing that demands that it be about instant gratification - other, possibly, than checking the display to make sure the image you have is the one you want and not some gross abomination... I mostly fail to download my pictures the same day I took them, sometimes it takes days to get round to it and then I have the pleasure of sorting out the duds and bringing out the best in the keepers in the comfort of my romm without smelly chemicals and mess.;)

    It's fair to say that to some degree the jury is still out on whether digital matches film - personally I say it pretty much equals it in many ways but whether it yet has, or ever will or should have, the same qualities of film is much more open to personal taste - but it's far better than you appear to believe it is.

    For the most part I'll stick with the enjoyment I get from my digiboxes but even so I won't be getting rid of my film cameras quite yet.:cool:
  8. lisadb

    lisadb Well-Known Member

    Welcome to the forum. :D
  9. Atavar

    Atavar Well-Known Member

    Thats assumeing anyone wants something as real as a print in the first place ;) I can't remember the last time i put ink to paper to make an image. All my pics live in cyber-space, literally never seeing the light of day, just the cathode ray or LCD panel that back lights them. I think digital may actually be closer to slide photography than negative - positive, both the images are captured in positive, both depend on an artificial light to be viewed... really, in my mind at least, its just the ease of edit and reproduction that sets them apart...

    I'm sorry the threads i've linked you to have got your first thread into a bit more conversation than i could have expected, i really hope it doesn't put you off the forum, its a fascinating angle that you are coming from.
  10. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    Welcome to the forum :)

    Interesting to see someone sticking to film.

    Have you ever shot on digital?

    What film do you tend to use?
  11. beelzebomb

    beelzebomb Member

    Not at all Atavar, a good start - forums = discussion = ideas, so all good!

    Yes, I have used digital when I was between cameras - borrowed from a friend. I appreciate the immediacy & usability, but I found the pictures I ended up with needed a fair bit of work in photoshop to get them as warm as the Velvia I tend to use (think that answers another question!:) ).

    I do use the Minolta Dimage III to scan my slides to be able to share them online. So nothing against the shift to digital. It's just frighteningly similar to the VHS Betamax war a few years back, where Beta' disappeared without trace, despite being as good if not (allegedly) better. I'd like to think digital & film photography can co-exist, but I fear my days are to be eventually numbered.

    This link may be something that many of you are already familiar with, but - & although I can't agree with it all, & some of it must be tongue in cheek, surely - it does make interesting reading: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm
  12. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Problem is that's 5 years old. Me, I used to use a Minolta Multi Pro to scan Velvia, but really, I get better results from my DSLR. The film v digital debate is long over, but certainly for now there's nothing to stop you using whichever you prefer.

Share This Page