first paid shoot using film only - some advice

[ongakublue]

Hi guys,

So I have done more than 100 shoots. Many tfp Fashion type stuff, portraits and also paid couples and a few commercial but all digital.

Last week I sold all my digital cameras. I currently have 5 film cameras. (Which was not actually by design. More accidental) The shoot is an engagement shoot. Various outdoor locations in the city.

I have a Nikon F3 with a 85mm 1.4 and a Nikon n8008s with an 50 1.8 (can be interchanged of course) I also have a useful 35-70 3.5 from Minolta on one of my srts. It has unusual and striking bokeh. I am thinking of bringing three camera bodies. I have nothing longer than 85 put I will survive that. Also a reflector and what about an inexpensive speedlight? Any thoughts? Actually I have done paid shoots without any artificial light at all. Just being careful of positioning and so on.

My question is about colour film. I have only shot b/w so far. I'd like something for outdoors and baring in mind it is autumn here. Maybe I could warm things up even more.

The second is the fact I can't afford and don't have time to do all the processing and printing/scanning myself. I must use the local photolab. Now, it is a big camera shop. The biggest in the country and is rated pretty highly so I guess I can trust them. nonetheless, any other advice. I should get negatives back from them for one thing I think.

Anyway, that's where I am at and I am interested to hear what you have to say. Too familiar with being able to look at the back of the camera when getting paid for it Cheers.

 

[blockend]

With due respect, I think you're crazy to do paid commercial work without thoroughly testing your equipment and films first.

 

[BrianShaw]

With all due respect, I agree.

But if you insist... Portra 160.

... and start looking for a high-quality processing lab that you can trust... and that you know what you'll be getting.

 

[ongakublue]

With due respect, I think you're crazy to do paid commercial work without thoroughly testing your equipment and films first.

Well I know all the cameras work. Also, where I live, the money is tiny for a shoot like this. The couple are American and know it is a cheap option. I highly doubt all three cameras could fail on me. Or do others think I am crazy too?

 

[cuthbert]

Well I know all the cameras work. Also, where I live, the money is tiny for a shoot like this. The couple are American and know it is a cheap option. I highly doubt all three cameras could fail on me. Or do others think I am crazy too?

No but shooting film is harder than shooting digital and I would recommend some ehm...training before getting a job.

However for the film if you can find a place where they develop E6 my suggestion for fashion would be Fujichrome Provia.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Thoroughly educate them that the shoot is not digital. What ever timeline you think you're going deliver the goods, double it. It's better to deliver the photos early than late. Keep track of every roll you shoot and process and bill for it with markup. Get all you duck in a row with equipment, film, film labs. In a digital age, chances are, your clients will think you're too slow if they are not educated on how long it takes to deliver analog photos.

 

[Jim Noel]

With due respect, I think you're crazy to do paid commercial work without thoroughly testing your equipment and films first.

I absolutely agree. Anyone is a fool to undertake such a project w/o a lot of practice with the equipment and materials. Processing of film is quite different from hitting a few keys on a computer. Who is going to process and print the film? Do you know exactly what to tell them your preferences all along the way?

This is what is giving photography a bad name. Owning a digital camera,or ay other, does not make one a photographer. It takes knowledge,practice and experience to be a good photographer.
Whoever is hiring this person is just as big a fool, if he has been honest with them.

 

[Rick A]

To the OP: Just because you know "the cameras all work", does not mean you know how to work them for optimum results. You are in a whole other universe now. I concur with the other posts, you need to spend time and money testing all the gear and film combos you plan on using before jumping out and charging for a "shoot".

 

[ongakublue]

I absolutely agree. Anyone is a fool to undertake such a project w/o a lot of practice with the equipment and materials. Processing of film is quite different from hitting a few keys on a computer. Who is going to process and print the film? Do you know exactly what to tell them your preferences all along the way?

This is what is giving photography a bad name. Owning a digital camera,or ay other, does not make one a photographer. It takes knowledge,practice and experience to be a good photographer.
Whoever is hiring this person is just as big a fool, if he has been honest with them.

So this was a great idea for a thread I should have thought about it first. I have a mate here who switched from digital to analogue a while ago. I should have just asked him. I don't like being called a fool. And you say the clients are also fools. Rather than the ad hominem, you could politely explain the issues as some of the others have. Yes, I don't know much about the process. You are right but you have absolutely no idea of my talent as a photographer in general. The years I have put into it. You assume I have next to no talent or experience in photography. I am not taking the time here to document what experience I have, who I have learned from and so on. Maybe you do think I have digital experience but that almost none of that translates into analogue either? My friend, almost all of it translates into analogue. Obviously. These clients, like most people, are used to instagram. And what interested them first is my style. It's the natural look. The at ease nature of the people I have photographed. The composition and so on. To accuse me of doing something bad for the art I love is offensive to me and SO misplaced.

I explained to the couple I shot analogue and showed them my analogue work and they liked it. I explained I shot digital and showed them that, which is considerably more and they loved it too. When I started in digital many years ago I could have been put off by someone like you but thank God I didn't meet someone with this attitude then. Now I hope my work speaks for itself. Anyway, I think I will bow out now. I learned my lesson about the kind of reaction one can get to a thread.

 

[BrianShaw]

... Anyway, I think I will bow out now. I learned my lesson about the kind of reaction one can get to a thread.

Well that is kinda disrespectful to the rest of us, don'tcha think?

When you put yourself out there you really have to expect any kind of response. Some will be more strongly stated than others.

 

[pdeeh]

It was a perfectly fine idea for a thread, but you have to expect the self-appointed moral arbiters of the photographic universe to chime in as well as the genuinely helpful ones. The "ignore" function allows you to blot these types out, as they rarely have anything useful to add to any thread.

 

[Paul Howell]

Although I agree that it best to have mastered your gear and experimented with several films before you took on a paid assignment, if you are in position that you to go full steam ahead then: How are the images going to be used, are you going to scan to a file or provide hard copies? Then you need to determine what film you can buy and have processed. E 6 would be my first choice, but if you cannot get Fuji in your area then what color negative films are available, if you are sending the shots by mail to a lab how reliable is your mail service? If not reliable you may want to slpit the film into a couple of different lots and mail on different days. Are you shooting in a studio or in daylight? Daylight can be a challenge, you need fill flash and reflectors. For a fashion shoot, no 28mm for a full body shot? 35 can work but a 28 is better, more so is shooting in a studio.

For color negative film I would use Porta 160.

 

[Trask]

Yeah, I think I'd be upset too if someone called me a fool. There are better way of making the point that practice makes perfect than to immediately go to pejoratives. I may sound touchy-feely here, but we're all in the analog photography game together, and only in extreme cases should people be thrown out of the lifeboat. Care in how we address each other maintains civility and mutual learning.

 

[benjiboy]

My best advice I can give you based on the information you have given on your lack of expertise and experience is don't do it.

 

[MattKing]

I wouldn't have called you a fool, but might have said you may have done something foolish.

The difference is subtle, but I hope that it is clear.

There is good specific advice in this thread respecting things like pinning down the required results, and time lines. More generally, I would advise that it is necessary to have knowledge and control over the whole process before you offer to sell the results. You are going to have to learn what your lab can reliably supply for you, and if it doesn't meet your needs, you will need to find another one that can.

Before you do the paid job.

I'm wishing you good luck. Hopefully, things will work out well, and you will have learned a whole bunch of valuable things.

And would suggest you lean on the experience of your friend, if possible.

 

[OptiKen]

I do not shoot professionally. I also rarely shoot people.
However, just because I have a camera I am occasionally asked to do a shoot for someone. In the past, I've used digital and loved the speed of shooting that way and the luxury of being able to take hundreds of shots in hopes of one keeper.
Last weekend while visiting relatives and friends in another state, I was asked by my niece if I would take pics of her and her (1 year) husband with my 'fancy cameras'. My fancy cameras were a Realist Stereo, a Leica IIIf, and a Exakta VX. No auto anything on any of them.
Doing the shoot outdoors created all sorts of challenges and taxed my feeble mind to remember everything that is needed for each shot and believe me, everything is a lot. The only advice I can give is to tell them that it is film and is a slower medium (experience) than digital because every single shot counts and is treated as such by you the photographer. Advice to you is to be patient and meticulous prior to each click of the shutter.
Have fun - it's a unique opportunity in this day and age. I think you will find the 'post-processing' work more enjoyable than what you might be used to with hundreds of digital prints from a shoot.

 

[bdial]

Proceeding the way you've outlined is a really excellent way to get bit in the butt, and in a zillion different ways. Many of us have learned the lesson by bitter experience.

As suggested, at least shoot a roll or two with some friends as models, get the film processed and scanned at the local shop, and evaluate the results. By doing that you will reduce the hazards by at least half a zillion or so, and you'll be able to work with your new clients with much more confidence which will make the whole thing go better.

 

[pentaxuser]

OP, there are two possible problems it seems to me and neither have anything to do with you being a fool. The first is that until you have shot a few films with the cameras you will use, then things can go wrong. Even very experienced analogue users need experience with new equipment. The problem with less than optimum results is that word spreads fast and you get judged on that first result for what is usually an unfairly long period afterwards.

The second is cost. I'd have thought that you will have to charge more than a digi shooter and may need more time to produce any results but of course you may have covered both of these points with the customers.

Good luck with the commission in any case.

pentaxuser

 

[OptiKen]

I just re-read some of the comments here and I think what most are forgetting is that the OP IS a photographer with lots of experience with film. This is just the first time he is doing a legitimate film shoot for money. From what I read, he has already done this before but in digital rather than film. The elements that make the shot - composition, lighting, contrast, subject, focus, aperture, shutter speed- he is already proficient at. He was asking what type of film would be best for this type of assignment as well as suggestions on lens/camera combinations and post work (labs to use, etc). In short, he is already a proficient driver he is just asking what the road is like.
My first reaction would be, "Congratulations on getting a film gig." That's awesome. I bet you will have a ball doing it and if you've handled people shoots well in the past, I bet the couple will come away with a great feeling and good experience as well. Good luck. It's gonna be fun!

 

[macfred]

I just re-read some of the comments here and I think what most are forgetting is that the OP IS a photographer with lots of experience with film. This is just the first time he is doing a legitimate film shoot for money. From what I read, he has already done this before but in digital rather than film. The elements that make the shot - composition, lighting, contrast, subject, focus, aperture, shutter speed- he is already proficient at. He was asking what type of film would be best for this type of assignment as well as suggestions on lens/camera combinations and post work (labs to use, etc). In short, he is already a proficient driver he is just asking what the road is like.
My first reaction would be, "Congratulations on getting a film gig." That's awesome. I bet you will have a ball doing it and if you've handled people shoots well in the past, I bet the couple will come away with a great feeling and good experience as well. Good luck. It's gonna be fun!

A comment in a particularly praiseworthy manner !

 

[mweintraub]

A comment in a particularly praiseworthy manner !

Agreed. I got the same thing from the OP. Has experience doing this with digital. Sold digital, only has film. Lined up a shoot (sought out or not) and will use film. Doesn't normally shoot color film. Asked for help in choosing.

Some valid points made in comments:
- Know and trust your lab. Try them out. This is similar to getting a new digital camera and using it for the first time, ever, at a paid shoot.
- Know the film. As someone mentioned, Portra 160. I would actually recommend Portra 400 for the extra latitude in exposure either way. I normally burn it at 200, but I have no fear of going higher rating.

 

[cuthbert]

Interesting, why everybody suggest Portra but not colour slides?

 

[macfred]

Interesting, why everybody suggest Portra but not colour slides?

Not only Portra -
I like FUJI Pro400H for portraits in natural light ...

The milkmaids by Andreas, on Flickr


I never used slidefilm for portrait work.

 

[macfred]

I never used slidefilm for portrait work.

Not true ... - I found one on Ektachrome Elite 100 (5045) :

Martin with Michelin by macfred64, on Flickr

 

[cuthbert]

Not only Portra -
I like FUJI Pro400H for portraits in natural light ...

The milkmaids by Andreas, on Flickr


I never used slidefilm for portrait work.

I'm also a fan of Fuji Pro, in the UK it's easy to find in Italy and I shoot five rolls this summer, before that I was almost exclusively shooting Portra:

Still, for the portrait of this nice girl I used Agfa Precisa (I think it's Provia 100), a Nikon F2A and a Nikkon K 85mm f1.8, I think the film did a good work, the photographer not much perhaps:

Other few people shots with the same setup:

For this one I used the same film and a Pentax Super A with A 50mm f1.4:

The young lady here was modeling for a friend with a digital camera but I took the opportunity to shoot her with my Spottie:

I don't think colour slide are a bad choice for people