Is it embarassing to shoot film?

tomalophicon · Jun 30, 2011

I just have to chant it again:

USA! USA! USA!

Diapositivo · Jun 30, 2011

As far as I know, engines which worked for years with leaded fuel have the valve seats already coated by lead and so suffer no problem. If you had to mount new valve seats, (and possibly also new valves, new cylinders, new pistons) you should use the lead additive for a certain number of kilometres in order to "coat" again the metal.

Engines for lead-free fuel have a different metal treatment so that they can last long without the lead coating.

Using lead-free fuel is a bit like using formalin-free final rinse with film. You can do it normally, but if you use old film you have to be aware that old-style final rinse, with stabilizer, might be needed

tomalophicon · Jun 30, 2011

FYI that forty year old Alfa was fine on unleaded fuel. However I did need to run it on high octane fuel or it was kinda sluggish!

njelle · Jun 30, 2011

Just a contribute!
i was out making a portrait once and some how journalists from a local newspaper were sitting around in their offices probably scratching their heads asking themselves what to write on the next issue and they spotted me with the dark-cloth over my head,
So they send out their ''press photographer'' and the dude almost stumbles his way through with a D300 i think it was-i'm only 26 and started out with digital but already rusty on the newest DSLRS they have out there-
So this guy is shooting me working my Kodak 2D 8x10 the whole time and i'm like ok its cool i'm used to people starring and asking weird questions or making statements on how old that stuff is, so i ignore him all the while not even knowing the best was coming.
So i finish doing my portrait and i'm just packing my stuff up when two ladies approach me and introduce themselves to be journalist from the newspaper, wanting to know all about what i was doing, what that thing was for and all!
I gotta say its Germany 2011 and people can't be that ignorant can they?

KarnyDoc · Jun 30, 2011

Steve Smith said:
<snip>

It seems ridiculous to me that you can suddenly find yourself owing $100,000 just because you tripped and fell and broke a bone.

<snip>

Six years ago, I slipped and fell while on my way home from work. I broke my left radius near the wrist.

Because of the difference in recovery times between surgery (a procedure called open retraction internal fixation, or ORIF) and a cast, I opted for the surgery, because I wanted to get back to work sooner. I underwent the same-day surgery twelve days after falling and breaking my arm.

The bill for that was $11,545, all covered by insurance. That figure does not include the ER visit to another hospital the day of the incident, nor the occupational therapy.

I now have a metal plate in my arm, attached by seven pins, and a scar approximately six centimeters long. If I move my hand a certain way, it looks like a worm inching its way along my forearm.

Dieter "scarred for life" Zakas

Steve Smith · Jun 30, 2011

KarnyDoc said:
The bill for that was $11,545, all covered by insurance.

That's fine if you have insurance and can afford it. With our system, you pay an additional tax taken directly from your wages (known as National Insurance). This is to cover any medical treatments, operations, procedures, doctors visits, etc. Everything except prescribed medication.

If you are not working and not contributing to the system it does not make any difference. It is available to all.

Steve.

ambaker · Jul 2, 2011

Not too long ago, I purchased a Canon EOS Elan 7e, because it came with a lens I wanted, for cheap money. Not too long after, an old steam train came to town on tour. I thought it would be fun to take a picture of the old technology, using "old" technology. That's all it took to hook me on film again.

Several people have seen me out with the camera, and asked "You still shoot film?" It gets a real look from them when, "No, I just started." (I hadn't shot any film in over 12 years.)

When my son took my old Canon A-1 to photography class, the instructor held it up in front of the entire class and announced, "Class, this is a REAL camera."

My newest cam is a Mamiya 645 super. Just got the first rolls back from the lab. I'm in love!

Sirius Glass · Jul 2, 2011

njelle said:
Just a contribute!
i was out making a portrait once and some how journalists from a local newspaper were sitting around in their offices probably scratching their heads asking themselves what to write on the next issue and they spotted me with the dark-cloth over my head,
So they send out their ''press photographer'' and the dude almost stumbles his way through with a D300 i think it was-i'm only 26 and started out with digital but already rusty on the newest DSLRS they have out there-
So this guy is shooting me working my Kodak 2D 8x10 the whole time and i'm like ok its cool i'm used to people starring and asking weird questions or making statements on how old that stuff is, so i ignore him all the while not even knowing the best was coming.
So i finish doing my portrait and i'm just packing my stuff up when two ladies approach me and introduce themselves to be journalist from the newspaper, wanting to know all about what i was doing, what that thing was for and all!
I gotta say its Germany 2011 and people can't be that ignorant can they?

What did you expect? They are journalists! Nothing more needs to be said.

dnjl · Jul 5, 2011

I usually get very positive reactions when people notice my camera looks like a metal brick. With all the DSLR shooters pointing their zoom lenses at anything that moves or stands, it seems that analog photography is regarded as "more serious". I once got two freelance job offers within the hour because I was taking pictures at a conference. Even with all the digital shooters around, participants assumed that I was the "official" photographer of the event because my AE-1 looked like the real deal

kand · Jul 5, 2011

Digital is perceived a to be easier. And for most folks its it. But not us APUGgers

Sirius Glass · Jul 5, 2011

kand said:
Digital is perceived a to be easier. And for most folks its it. But not us APUGgers

Yes, I perceive digital to be a non-starter.

xtolsniffer · Jul 18, 2011

I had an interesting experience a few days ago. I've been shooting film for something like thirty years, have my own small darkroom etc etc. Since having two small and very busy children, I've not had the opportunity to shoot much, I still get familiy shots on Reala on a Nikon F100, and black and white on HP5 in a Nikon FM2 but I've not done any transparency work for a while. I was able to get a few hours out on my own at a local nature reserve the other evening. I wanted to get some stock shots of early sucessional plants (plants that colonise bare ground), so was using a D700, somehow it wasn't much fun, I was getting the shots I wanted but there wasn't much of a 'lift' to it, I was almost bored. Then I found some peeling birch bark in a nice pattern and took out my Nikon F4, put in some Provia and set that up, and I had the best hour I've had in years. I have no idea what the difference was, but just having film, being able to concentrate on the viewfinder and think about what I wanted to get rather than look at the screen after each shot was just perfect.

Having gathered a small audience who wondered what I was doing, there were a few surprised gasps when I said that I was using film, along with a few 'I didn't know you could still get it' comments. I could think of a lot of reasons to justify using film, but the bottom line was it was just a joy to use it. That's good enough for me.

Worker 11811 · Jul 18, 2011

I've been out shooting film nearly every day for the last few weeks. The more I shoot the more confident I feel, both in respect to my own photography and in respect to digital vs. film.

On two different occasions I came across professional photographers who were on the job who didn't know the first thing about things like shutter speed and aperture. One was an older guy who noticed my camera and made the standard, "I didn't know you could still get film..." comment. We were talking about photographing sunsets and I mentioned that I sometimes shoot "one stop over." I had to explain to him what apertures and stops were.

Another guy who was shooting yearbook portraits by the shore. I was shooting Adox CMS-20 at the time. It was getting close to sunset and I was quickly running out of light. I wanted to shoot a picture of this lighthouse on the shore and he was shooing his client/model with the lighthouse as the backdrop. I politely and quietly waited for him to finish his set then I asked for permission to shoot. I said, "I'm shooting ASA 20 film, here, and I've only got about 10 more minutes of light. Do you mind if I grab a shot, real quick?" The guy was absolutely clueless. If he wasn't on the job with a client, I would have explained it to him but I simply grabbed my shot, thanked him and walked back to my car.

BTW: Remember when I mentioned the picture of the tall ship I took while the guy with the digital Nikon was machine gunning shot after shot? Well, that ONE picture I took with my Yashica Mat is going to sell! As far as I know, that guy is still back there machine gunning with his digi-crapper.

So, as time goes on, not only do I feel less self conscious about using film, I feel quite GOOD about it! Sometimes I even feel a little sorry for the digi-snappers.

benjiboy · Jul 18, 2011

Some cheeky bas**rd a few weeks ago when I was shooting with a Canon F1 and cranking the winder asked me "where do you put the flint in it"

Thomas Bertilsson · Jul 18, 2011

benjiboy said:
Some cheeky bas**rd a few weeks ago when I was shooting with a Canon F1 and cranking the winder asked me "where do you put the flint in it"

Tell him: "In Michelangelo's pocket".

DWThomas · Jul 18, 2011

I guess I landed in the right place last Monday. I was in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, checking out what was happening in redeveloping the defunct steel mill. Had a very expensive lunch in the casino, then wandered toward the blast furnaces where there is supposed to eventually be a museum of some sort. As it turned out, a large sculptural piece was being installed near a new outdoor performance area in front of the furnaces (the "SteelStacks Campus"). I saw a hefty tripod with something on it connected via cables to boxes on the ground and assumed this was an official video recording of the event. Later, as the guy walked past me he stopped, smiled, stared at my Perkeo II and said, "Whoa - a folder -- is that a Voigtlander?" I said yes - "Skopar lens?" yes, etc. and he went on at some length about how great some of those cameras are. Then I learned the "video" camera was actually a Bolex H16 with electro goodies to do time lapse. He also pointed out an even large rig across the way bearing a 35 mm movie camera with similar time lapse setup. "A film record will last 500 years."

Later in the process, another guy came by and went on about how he still has two Nikon film cameras and sees no need to change, etc., etc.

So don't know if it's a side effect of a somewhat faded mill town or not, but I certainly felt more like a celebrity than embarrassed using film there.

(The day as seen via Perkeo)

Jay Abbas · Jul 18, 2011

Better to sell you a ( soon to be discontinued even though its new ) 259.95 digi snapper every couple of years than a 6.00 roll of film as film cameras effectively are obsolete proof. A partial thought as to the ongoing bit vs gelatin war.

Worker 11811 · Jul 18, 2011

benjiboy said:
Some cheeky bas**rd a few weeks ago when I was shooting with a Canon F1 and cranking the winder asked me "where do you put the flint in it"

You take the rechargeable battery out of your digicam and pour 90 grains of triple-f black powder into the compartment. Tamp it down really well. Close the cover and light a match to it!

Jeff Kubach · Jul 19, 2011

That's what I do!

Jeff

Les Berkley · Jul 19, 2011

Worker 11811 said:
As far as I know, that guy is still back there machine gunning with his digi-crapper.

So, as time goes on, not only do I feel less self conscious about using film, I feel quite GOOD about it! Sometimes I even feel a little sorry for the digi-snappers.

Don't think I belong here. I figured there would be people enjoying photography. I shoot film. I shoot digital. Instead I read this kind of sneering crap, all the while remembering Neil Liefer and his 9fps 250 exposure backs.

BradS · Jul 19, 2011

Les Berkley said:
Don't think I belong here. I figured there would be people enjoying photography. I shoot film. I shoot digital. Instead I read this kind of sneering crap, all the while remembering Neil Liefer and his 9fps 250 exposure backs.

We DO enjoy photography. Photography involves the use of FILM.

Les Berkley · Jul 19, 2011

BradS said:
We DO enjoy photography. Photography involves the use of FILM.

Exclusively? By whose authority?

Ken Nadvornick · Jul 19, 2011

Les Berkley said:
Don't think I belong here.

Hi Les,

Please try not to take it personally. You are definitely welcome here, but whether you feel you belong is, of course, up to you.

Speaking from my own experience only, I think the problem is two-fold.

First, traditional film users have been so beaten up over the years for their choice to stick with that medium - even if mixed in with digital - that sometimes they just get fed up. I know I've heard it all, both online and in person. I often use large format bellows cameras out in public (8x10, 4x5, 4x5 Crown Graphic), so there's nowhere for me to hide. I very much enjoy the curiosity and good-faith questions, but not so much the snide put down remarks regarding my inability to deal with high tech.*

And second, we seem to be living in a zero-sum world where the assumption is that it's either digital or traditional. While not strictly true, and you seem to be an example of that, many film users resent digital not because of the technology, but rather because of its negative impact on the industrial manufacturing base required to continue producing film. A huge number of traditional products have either disappeared, or have increased dramatically in price. It can sometimes be easy to resent that indirect effect.

I might suggest you give this place a longer look. There's a huge number of very knowledgable and talented contributors around here, most of which are very generous with their time.

Ken

* I have been a software engineer for over twenty years now. Go figure...

moose10101 · Jul 19, 2011

BradS said:
We DO enjoy photography. Photography involves the use of FILM.

I guess all those people who do direct positives onto paper aren't doing "photography" . Shooting film shouldn't embarrass you, but having that kind of attitude should.

Les, if you can get past the "sneering crap" (an unfortunately accurate label), you'll really enjoy APUG. Just try to avoid all of the "film vs. digital" threads.

Dave in Kansas · Jul 19, 2011

Les,

I think Ken stated the situation quite well. There are a number of APUG members who shoot both digital and film, and I am one of them. But I shoot much more film than digital because I enjoy the process more and realize I don't have to worry about lost data. But I will use digital when it is the better choice (such as low light) and I try to not put it down. Some people will make snide comments and are serious and some are only half serious or even semi joking. I think we all regret the loss of so many of our favorite films and other film related products that has happened as a result of the digital age.

Please stick around and consider all the great things this forum has to offer.

Dave

Is it embarassing to shoot film?

kand

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency