Discussion in 'Everything Film' started by Stephen Rundle, Jun 26, 2020.
I can’t do that - visualise. If I start to think about it I’m lost.
Still doesn't always work out .
Work out the terrain an a map , work out where the sun will be at a certain time and day in the year , get lucky with the weather , a nice character full sky with the right amount / type of cloud .
And then you find a stream of coaches with bloody tourists tramping along one after the other !
Out come the digital for a snapshot !
Do you follow “on landscape”? .
I wonder how many photographs of historic, or personal, importance didn't get taken because film was a limited resource and "a better shot may come along later"? We have already been shown images (Napalm girl) where technically the image isn't perfect but it was taken. With AF and digital imaging technology it is many times more likely that an "event" will be captured than it was just 20 years ago. Despite what others may think accessibility is much improved too, I can get at an image from 2004 in seconds, to find a slide from that year could take hours. The "hit" rate from my D3 and D4 bodies has been much higher than I ever achieved with an F5 and I was happy with what I was getting at the time.
In short, film is about the experience of using, processing and enjoying it and somewhat less about the absolute quality of the results.
Yes, digital is a throw away medium and fewer users take much effort to produce an image but then again there are several orders of magnitude more users and thus more images. Today I may take 1,000 images a month, back in 1999 that might have been 2,000 a year, more if we go on holiday somewhere. There are images in my collection that I wouldn't have attempted 20 years ago and certainly not 30 years ago, advancing technology has helped greatly as has the reduction in cost.
By all means enjoy film and all it brings with it but don't forget that the world has moved on and a lot of you* scan your negatives to get something to work on in software.
*I say "you" because I can't include myself as I don't use film much and I don't scan negatives.
Sorry , I don't understand the question .
Who or what is "on landscape" ?
Online magazine started by Tim Parkin and Joe Cornish - just issued edition 208. Although cancelled this year because of virus, they also hold an annual conference at Penrith. As you might guess the magazine is dedicated to landscape - a lot of it large format. I dropped my subscription a year or so back because I wasn't getting enough time to read it but I still get the emails each month. I might sign up again, all the back issues used to be available.
No , I hadn't heard of that .
I'll probably have a look into that , thanks .
This is why I use both film and digital .
I started with film ( I sent the tokens off the backs of cornflake boxes for a free camera in the 80's when I was a kid ) , saved up a few months wages in the mid 90's to get a used Minolta 7000AF and a set of lenses .
Still shooting Minolta and using the lenses with Sony DSLRs .
The cost of film cameras plummeting is how it was so easy to get into the larger formats .
I use film because I enjoy the process of using them , and developing the film afterwards .
Still not finished building my darkroom though !
I don't miss shots because I use film and don't want to waste it , if a shots worth using film on , I take it .
Also when I'm out I always have a digital camera with me as well .
If I'm just walking around with a film SLR , I'll probably have my NEX 7 in my pocket with its 16-55mm lens on it .
If I'm using medium format , that camera and some lenses / film backs will probably be in my backpack and I'll probably have a DSLR on my shoulder .
Same goes for large format .
Or for digital it might be my old Minolta DiMage A200 bridge camera that I have with me .
So whatever's happening , I'll not miss out .
Separate names with a comma.