letting go, or no ?

removed account4 · May 8, 2014

it seems like there are a lot of people who are "thrifty" with their exposures ..
i don't mean stingy i mean you save the film for what matters and don't bother for anything else
whether it is because of time or money or energy or the extra-exposures would just mean extra "waste"

does this mean that if you are in your routine or whatever it is for you to do "your thing" and something
outside the scope of your framework of photography appeared you would not take the photograph?
or would you take it anyways?
and does this mean you wouldn't make more than 1 exposure for each situation/scenerio or whatever it is that
you are photographing ?
when i was working at a newspaper i learned early on not only to photograph the subject but don't just take 1 or 2 exposures
because that was it ... sometimes i used a whole roll sometimes 2, and sometimes 15 frames but never 1 or 2 ...
do the thrifty-photographers stop at a certain frame count? sometimes great things happen when you don't think about it .. (even with mistakes)

piu58 · May 8, 2014

I look twice before I shoot once. The most important urge for saving film is not the cost but the time I need to process it. On most half-day-trips I need one or two rolls of 120 film.

Bob Carnie · May 8, 2014

I am glad Winograd didn't think like this

StoneNYC said:
I think if you're just taking a bunch of pictures and not really thinking if the shot is worth taking or is any good and shot a ton in one day, you might as well just shoot digital since you're just using the machine gun mentally anyway.

Then again, assuming you are buying new, you waste as many sheets as you like, this will drop the film prices for the rest of us

eddie · May 8, 2014

I think of film/paper/chemistry as if they're food in the 'fridge/pantry. They're both nice to have fully stocked, but have no nutritional value just sitting there...

BrianShaw · May 8, 2014

piu58 said:
I look twice before I shoot once. The most important urge for saving film is not the cost but the time I need to process it. On most half-day-trips I need one or two rolls of 120 film.

Good philosphy and one I try to follow. But experience has shown me that one had better look twice QUICKLY or sometimes the opportunity will vanish.

mgb74 · May 8, 2014

Moderation in all things - including moderation.

Like a tripod, I think being aware of the film you're using up makes you (at least me) more careful/deliberate of composition and exposure. If I was a better photographer, maybe that wouldn't be necessary.

But if being aware of the film you're using up makes you more likely to miss a good shot, then it's counterproductive. Particularly when shooting an event or other "fleeting" moment.

bdial · May 8, 2014

Rachelle and eddie said it well for me.

When I expose a frame, I want it to be worthwhile, but at the same time, I don't worry if I'm exposing 1 frame or 10, or even 50, if what's in front of me warrants it.
Interestingly, I think, is that when I use my electronic camera, I'm the same way. I might take it out, shoot just one frame and put it back in my pocket.

StoneNYC · May 8, 2014

I suppose if nothing you ever shoot is good, it doesn't matter how many you take, and you can just go about shooting lots if film and it doesn't matter

eddie · May 8, 2014

StoneNYC said:
I suppose if nothing you ever shoot is good, it doesn't matter how many you take, and you can just go about shooting lots if film and it doesn't matter

The corollary is, if you know what you're doing, you'll find more reasons to press the shutter.

StoneNYC · May 8, 2014

eddie said:
The corollary is, if you know what you're doing, you'll find more reasons to press the shutter.

I think if you know what you're doing you'll only need to take one shot the best one... Haha

But I agree, I how you said that too

Thomas Bertilsson · May 8, 2014

mgb74 said:
But if being aware of the film you're using up makes you more likely to miss a good shot, then it's counterproductive. Particularly when shooting an event or other "fleeting" moment.

This goes to show that the film usage rate is different for everybody. If you're a very contemplative photographer, deliberately and carefully studying a scene before even setting the camera up, then film usage is going to be very low.

If you are among people, at events like weddings or maybe fashion shows, your film usage is going to be very different.

If you can afford it, it would be foolish to let some arbitrary film usage rule dictate how much film we use, when we should be shooting as much film as the situation requires.

NedL · May 8, 2014

I'm normally very slow, which is good because I can't keep up with printing. Many days I carry a camera and don't make even a single picture. 5 or 6 would be a lot for one day. A couple weeks ago my daughter was in a parade, and I used up a short roll before the parade was 1/2 over and wished I'd had more film. That was fun! But none of this has anything at all to do with the cost of film... that doesn't enter into it for me. The cost is all time cost in printing and not having to sort through too many negatives.

eddie · May 8, 2014

I mean that, once you get to the point that you're in command of your materials, and don't have to think about the technical aspects, you only have to see. And, once you've advanced to that point, you're free to see more.

DWThomas · May 8, 2014

jnanian said:
. . .
does this mean that if you are in your routine or whatever it is for you to do "your thing" and something
outside the scope of your framework of photography appeared you would not take the photograph?
or would you take it anyways?
and does this mean you wouldn't make more than 1 exposure for each situation/scenerio or whatever it is that
you are photographing ? . . .

In the first scenario, I would shoot -- it's even possible some of my best work has been an opportunistic aside while approaching another project. And I have sometimes taken more than one; e.g., two exposures per scene, usually with slight exposure bracketing. I began doing that after having a difficult to fix dust blivet in a frame -- nice to have a backup. And a roll of film is way cheaper than a fifty or sixty mile (or more!) round trip to re-shoot. But I never shoot five or six with just minor adjustments in exposure or perspective. I'll do one or two and then make a major change in viewpoint (even on pinhole day!)

Black Dog · May 8, 2014

eddie said:
I only think about the cost of film, paper, chemicals, etc. when I place the order.
Once delivered, I only think about the possibilities...

A man after my own heart!

MattKing · May 8, 2014

I used to photograph weddings, so I tend to be quite aware of how close I am to the next roll change.
I tend to be a bit more careful of my use of my remaining Plus-X than TmY2. And for the same reason, my remaining E100, both because it isn't going to be easily replaced after it is gone, and because of the cost of having it processed.
In general, I am careful about exposing film, but I am not the least reluctant to expose lots of film when doing so seems appropriate.
And in respect to one of Stone's comments above, there are very few photo opportunities indeed where there is only one excellent photo possibility. That is brought home clearly to me any time I join other photographers on a photo outing.

pgomena · May 8, 2014

The only time I worry about wasting film is if I don't have enough film with me. I try to avoid that situation.

Surely enough, when you've used the last frame, something better will come along.

37th Exposure · May 8, 2014

The number of once in a lifetime subjects is inversely proportional to the number of exposures remaining.

NB23 · May 8, 2014

I'm always cautious because if i shoot like crazy it will mean that I'll have to print like crazy. I have to print my best shots in each roll, somekind of pet peeve.

TheFlyingCamera · May 8, 2014

I'm currently well stocked in the film department, to the point I need to start shooting more rather than less so I don't have film sitting idle. But I always make sure I have enough that I won't run out while shooting somewhere, especially on a photo-centric trip (like my trip to Paris in October - I had something like 150 rolls of film with me, between the Tri-X, Portra 800, Portra 160, Ektar 100 and FP4+ (I never did shoot any of the FP4+, but I have a boatload of it sitting around so I thought why not bring a bunch of it along just in case)). I managed to shoot something like 30-35 rolls in 9 days, so now I have an overstock, but hey. I won't need to worry about not having enough.

StoneNYC · May 8, 2014

TheFlyingCamera said:
I'm currently well stocked in the film department, to the point I need to start shooting more rather than less so I don't have film sitting idle. But I always make sure I have enough that I won't run out while shooting somewhere, especially on a photo-centric trip (like my trip to Paris in October - I had something like 150 rolls of film with me, between the Tri-X, Portra 800, Portra 160, Ektar 100 and FP4+ (I never did shoot any of the FP4+, but I have a boatload of it sitting around so I thought why not bring a bunch of it along just in case)). I managed to shoot something like 30-35 rolls in 9 days, so now I have an overstock, but hey. I won't need to worry about not having enough.

When I traveled around the country for my Kodachrome trip, I had 75 rolls to my name and 39 days to do it in. And I still have 10 rolls left because I just didn't have enough things to shoot worth shooting, in fact I probably wasted some at the end thinking it would be a waste to not have it processed, but the images themselves were mostly a waste because they are garbage because I was shooting just to shoot.

I agree if you're good enough, every image will be worthwhile, but I think if you're good enough, you wouldn't need to take every shot because you would know what was worth taking.

Let's stop talking about it and go shoot!

Jaf-Photo · May 8, 2014

StoneNYC said:
When I traveled around the country for my Kodachrome trip, I had 75 rolls to my name and 39 days to do it in. And I still have 10 rolls left because I just didn't have enough things to shoot worth shooting, in fact I probably wasted some at the end thinking it would be a waste to not have it processed, but the images themselves were mostly a waste because they are garbage because I was shooting just to shoot.

I agree if you're good enough, every image will be worthwhile, but I think if you're good enough, you wouldn't need to take every shot because you would know what was worth taking.

Let's stop talking about it and go shoot!

One funny thing that happens to me is that I often get stuck with a few unused exposures at the end of rolls. It's mainly due to time constraints, time is up and I have to leave. So usually I shoot them very fast without much thought, just to finish the roll and not waste any film.

Often those last shots produce my favourite shot on the entire roll. Weird.

TheFlyingCamera · May 8, 2014

StoneNYC said:
When I traveled around the country for my Kodachrome trip, I had 75 rolls to my name and 39 days to do it in. And I still have 10 rolls left because I just didn't have enough things to shoot worth shooting, in fact I probably wasted some at the end thinking it would be a waste to not have it processed, but the images themselves were mostly a waste because they are garbage because I was shooting just to shoot.

I agree if you're good enough, every image will be worthwhile, but I think if you're good enough, you wouldn't need to take every shot because you would know what was worth taking.

Let's stop talking about it and go shoot!

It was never a question of shooting just to shoot, or being "good enough". There are shots you take because you have that moment of vision where the scene just snaps together in the viewfinder and you are compelled to take the photo. There are others that are experiments - "how will this look if I try it this way?". And there are "I have to take this shot" photos that are in some way technically or artistically flawed, but you'd kick yourself for taking a pass. And lastly, there are the "record" shots - photos, no matter how banal, that need to be taken because what you're doing would not be complete without them (like going to Paris for the first time and NOT taking a photo of the Eiffel Tower. That said, there are Eiffel Tower photos and then there are Eiffel Tower photos. I aim for the latter...so even a record shot has SOME artistic merit).

eddie · May 8, 2014

TheFlyingCamera said:
But I always make sure I have enough that I won't run out while shooting somewhere, especially on a photo-centric trip (like my trip to Paris in October - I had something like 150 rolls of film with me...

I do the same, for my month in the Caribbean. If the trip is photo-centric, the last thing I want to do is start rationing film. Close to home, I may leave the house with only a roll, or two (although, this winter, I had to go home for more...)

Steve Roberts · May 8, 2014

The rapidly rising cost of materials (especially E6 film) has certainly curtailed the amount of film I've shot over the last couple of years. However, I still wouldn't hold back from shooting lavishly on a subject that deserved it. What has gone by the board are the large number of average shots that I'd previously have taken just because I'd gone somewhere and felt the need to justify the trip by shooting some film. Nowadays I'm much more prepared to go out with the camera and kit and come home without taking the camera out of its case if there was no subject or opportunity to justify doing so.

Steve

letting go, or no ?

removed account4

piu58

Bob Carnie

eddie

BrianShaw

mgb74

bdial

StoneNYC

eddie

StoneNYC

Thomas Bertilsson

NedL

eddie

DWThomas

Black Dog

MattKing

Moderator

pgomena

37th Exposure

NB23

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

StoneNYC

Jaf-Photo

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

eddie

Steve Roberts

letting go, or no ?

Moderator

Membership Council

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency