Moving Back To The Darkside.

[Cholentpot]

Well here goes.

I started photography back in '13 with a Soviet TLR a few rolls of Tmax 400 and no clue about anything whatsoever. I didn't even know what ISO was and spent a month trying to figure out what depth of field meant.

A few months later I stumbled across a Rebel T2i in a pawnshop and moved to digital for a while. Move ahead 6 months and I was gifted a Nikkormat and a bag of black and white film. Since then I've shot 35mm film, 120, color and C-41 developed myself, set up a darkroom and printed. My Rebel became a scanner and that was that.

I just got setup with a side gig photographing exteriors and interiors of foreclosed or houses needing work. Out came the 'ol Rebel and I guess I need to re-embrace Digital. I was spoiled by the latitude of film, I really find that once again I have to pay attention to exposure or I'll blowout my highlights.

I do really enjoy film but I'd have to be crazy to shoot for this kind of work. It makes a bit of side cash that I think will go towards a better camera and a wide lens. At this point all I have to do is be better than Mr. Realtor with an Iphone which is really no sweat.

So here I go, film for fun, digital for business.

 

[tedr1]

Either/or can be a problem, both is good

 

[Cholentpot]

Either/or can be a problem, both is good

Digital feels light and fluffy after shooting film for 3 years. Click click click. And then hours of processing...forgot about that.

 

[Eric Rose]

For me at least I think of all image making devices and materials as just tools. I use the one(s) that will work to produce the image I want. Sometimes it's digital and sometimes it's film. In my eyes they are equals in the tool chest.

 

[Cholentpot]

For me at least I think of all image making devices and materials as just tools. I use the one(s) that will work to produce the image I want. Sometimes it's digital and sometimes it's film. In my eyes they are equals in the tool chest.

I agree with you on this one.

As a newish photographer though, digital has always been touted as the solution to all photographs problems. And I guess if you grew with the only option as film that may feel very true. However I'm feeling digital has it's own heaping pile of challenges that offset it's solutions.

I gotta find me an affordable better camera though, I'm stretching the limits of my Rebel. Magic Lantern sure helps revitalize it but it's time for me to start seriously thinking about upgrading.

 

[Bob Carnie]

For me at least I think of all image making devices and materials as just tools. I use the one(s) that will work to produce the image I want. Sometimes it's digital and sometimes it's film. In my eyes they are equals in the tool chest.

I feel exactly like Eric on this, even though I have never used a digital camera, if I did I would use the right camera for the type of prints I want to make.

 

[Sirius Glass]

For me at least I think of all image making devices and materials as just tools. I use the one(s) that will work to produce the image I want. Sometimes it's digital and sometimes it's film. In my eyes they are equals in the tool chest.

However we owe it mankind and modern technical knowledge to keep film alive and functioning.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

It is no shame to use either/both for whatever purpose and whenever it is desired. They are of course, just tools to a man, a means to an end. Today I did most of my cycling photography with my Android!
I have very rarely printed anything from digital, but have printed each and every frame of 120 roll since Nelson lost an eye. I guess it is that touchy, tactile, satisfying feeling of handling a real photograph rather than grasping at ones and zeros!

I do really enjoy film but I'd have to be crazy to shoot for this kind of work. It makes a bit of side cash that I think will go towards a better camera and a wide lens. At this point all I have to do is be better than Mr. Realtor with an Iphone which is really no sweat.

That is jumping to a premature belief. Competency and expertise in a chosen field will allow you to approach a job with any tool, in this case either digital or film, and produce the highest quality results to impress from either or both. One is not better than the other, except to those with active imaginations. In a nutshell, equipment is nothing at all if one lacks skill. So build up skill, lots and lots of it, with experience and then consider what is required by way of equipment.

 

[Cholentpot]

It is no shame to use either/both for whatever purpose and whenever it is desired. They are of course, just tools to a man, a means to an end. Today I did most of my cycling photography with my Android!
I have very rarely printed anything from digital, but have printed each and every frame of 120 roll since Nelson lost an eye. I guess it is that touchy, tactile, satisfying feeling of handling a real photograph rather than grasping at ones and zeros!




That is jumping to a premature belief. Competency and expertise in a chosen field will allow you to approach a job with any tool, in this case either digital or film, and produce the highest quality results to impress from either or both. One is not better than the other, except to those with active imaginations. In a nutshell, equipment is nothing at all if one lacks skill. So build up skill, lots and lots of it, with experience and then consider what is required by way of equipment.

At this point is the catchword.

I, of course, will strive to do the best I can. But to begin with I need to be better than the lowest common denominator to keep getting gigs. I got the skill but not the experience. I learned on the hard mode of film, digital gives me instant feedback. With the feedback I can see what I need to tweak, film also gave me the advantage of learning to get it right the first time in camera. This saves time. More time more gigs, more gigs more experience, more experience more skill growth and on and on.

The reason for shooting digital is chiefly that the client wants the results NOW. Not in a day or tonight but NOW. They are shocked when I tell them I can't beam the photos straight from the camera. I need to sneaker the card to a computer then send 'em off. With film it would take me a bit more time than that.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I agree with you on this one.

[...]
I gotta find me an affordable better camera though, I'm stretching the limits of my Rebel. Magic Lantern sure helps revitalize it but it's time for me to start seriously thinking about upgrading.

I have Canon's guide to EOS and it is showing the Rebel (EOS 1000) and Rebel S (1000F), along with 1992-era Rebel II and SII ((100N and 1000FN respectively). What are you using? These are now very old cameras and their reliability has always been questionable. Pointedly, none of these cameras are considered good buys today.

I agree you should angle for another, more solid camera, but with the age of all EOS cameras getting on, reliability must always been central to your thoughts.
Getting a bigger, "better" camera may give you a placebo feeling of grabbing success by the jugular, but those bigger cameras also come with a reasonably steep learning curve e.g. what if you upgraded from the Rebel to the EOS 1V? Or the EOS 1N? These are big. Fast. Heavy. And very impressive, even by today's standards against digital, but they are not necessarily straightforward in use (that is to say practice, practice, practice). If you're sticking with Canon, one of these 'big guns' might be the way to go, but like the Elans and Rebels of yore, the older EOS 1N (stear clear of the EOS 1, the first generation) can also be hobbled by dead internal lithium battery button that holds system settings when the battery is removed. Replacement of this battery is a service bench task and is not cheap (or timely).

Then, what about the lens on the front? This is where a good chunk of your investment (income from gigs!) should be made. Speaking from personal experience and comparisons between the two sets (EF standard and L-series) Canon's base zooms and primes are quite ordinary performers. My first EF lens was a 28-105 f3.5-4.5 (I think). I used this carefully and there are several small Ilfochrome Classic prints on my walls that show how well these very basic zooms perform when used with care.
In 1994 I abandoned all and took out loans to pick up my my first L-series lens (24mm TS-E and 70-200mm f2.8), living off a boiled egg and Vegemite sammies for 2 weeks at a time, finishing those loans within 2 years. I still have these two lenses (and 5 more...).

There is a bigger question though. What if you skipped 35mm and moved up to medium format? 6x4.5, 6x6 — OK, you need something that meters itself, I understand that.
I cannot put my finger on digital as the panacea for everything. That is not how I think!
It is true though that the immediacy and flexibility of formats of digital has steam, but I think it is generally misplaced and supplanted more by a herd-mentality enthusiasm to "I will do the same as he does". This speaks of gross ignorance of the choices available and the depth of competency that photographers have e.g. fluency in both film and digital. What are you in for? By the way, digital imaging can be a long, drawn out and very frustrating experience with a computer, and you must charge your client for computer time, too.

Just to let you know, when I finished professional production this year, everything, everything was made on film. Never once was I asked to do things "now, today, on a digital camera". I don't really know if any of the clients knew I had, at the time two digital cameras (Nikon Df, which I sold in April and a Fuji X-30, which I still have).
Maybe I just got lucky with people recognising the niche I worked in and had mastered, and which was accepted. Maybe times have changed. Or maybe nothing has changed at all.

 

[Cholentpot]

I have Canon's guide to EOS and it is showing the Rebel (EOS 1000) and Rebel S (1000F), along with 1992-era Rebel II and SII ((100N and 1000FN respectively). What are you using? These are now very old cameras and their reliability has always been questionable. Pointedly, none of these cameras are considered good buys today.

I agree you should angle for another, more solid camera, but with the age of all EOS cameras getting on, reliability must always been central to your thoughts.
Getting a bigger, "better" camera may give you a placebo feeling of grabbing success by the jugular, but those bigger cameras also come with a reasonably steep learning curve e.g. what if you upgraded from the Rebel to the EOS 1V? Or the EOS 1N? These are big. Fast. Heavy. And very impressive, even by today's standards against digital, but they are not necessarily straightforward in use (that is to say practice, practice, practice). If you're sticking with Canon, one of these 'big guns' might be the way to go, but like the Elans and Rebels of yore, the older EOS 1N (stear clear of the EOS 1, the first generation) can also be hobbled by dead internal lithium battery button that holds system settings when the battery is removed. Replacement of this battery is a service bench task and is not cheap (or timely).

Then, what about the lens on the front? This is where a good chunk of your investment (income from gigs!) should be made. Speaking from personal experience and comparisons between the two sets (EF standard and L-series) Canon's base zooms and primes are quite ordinary performers. My first EF lens was a 28-105 f3.5-4.5 (I think). I used this carefully and there are several small Ilfochrome Classic prints on my walls that show how well these very basic zooms perform when used with care.
In 1994 I abandoned all and took out loans to pick up my my first L-series lens (24mm TS-E and 70-200mm f2.8), living off a boiled egg and Vegemite sammies for 2 weeks at a time, finishing those loans within 2 years. I still have these two lenses (and 5 more...).

There is a bigger question though. What if you skipped 35mm and moved up to medium format? 6x4.5, 6x6 — OK, you need something that meters itself, I understand that.
I cannot put my finger on digital as the panacea for everything. That is not how I think!
It is true though that the immediacy and flexibility of formats of digital has steam, but I think it is generally misplaced and supplanted more by a herd-mentality enthusiasm to "I will do the same as he does". This speaks of gross ignorance of the choices available and the depth of competency that photographers have e.g. fluency in both film and digital. What are you in for? By the way, digital imaging can be a long, drawn out and very frustrating experience with a computer, and you must charge your client for computer time, too.

Just to let you know, when I finished professional production this year, everything, everything was made on film. Never once was I asked to do things "now, today, on a digital camera". I don't really know if any of the clients knew I had, at the time two digital cameras (Nikon Df, which I sold in April and a Fuji X-30, which I still have).
Maybe I just got lucky with people recognising the niche I worked in and had mastered, and which was accepted. Maybe times have changed. Or maybe nothing has changed at all.

I use a 550D (T2i) with Magic Lantern installed. I would be looking to move to a 60D or even a 6D due to the controls being more accessible. As for lenses, I'm looking to get the EF-S 10-18 to start to give me a wider field of view. As of now I'm using an 18-55 because that's the widest I have, previously I ignored wide lenses and was looking for longer lenses. For 35mm Canon I use an A2, and EOS 500N. I'm confident I can handle just about any camera I put in my hands, I'm not looking for biggest and latest but I am looking for a more rugged accessible platform. I do use 6x4.5 (Mamiya M645) 6x6 (Bronica S2, Richoflex, Lubitel 2) I even bring out the Brownie No2 every once in a while. I tend to ignore metering outdoors but indoors I do rely on it quite heavily.

The work I am doing has a need for a very fast turnover. These would not be pretty houses, they are what you'd call flips. Client buys from bank and then sells low to make a small profit. They need someone to come in quick, take photos quick and get out quick. If I called them 20 minutes after and told them my film was drying they would laugh at me and hang up the phone. Computer time is an issue but I've got my workflow down pretty pat.

If there's one thing I know it's that I don't go with the herd mentality. I've always marched to my own tune even when it took me off a cliff. I can't help it. I'm in my third decade and learning to embrace it and enjoy the ride. I do so love film, and I do enjoy digital too. I get a kick out of all kinds of photography. It's word processor vs. calligraphy. Each can be beautiful.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

If there's one thing I know it's that I don't go with the herd mentality. I've always marched to my own tune even when it took me off a cliff. I can't help it. I'm in my third decade and learning to embrace it and enjoy the ride. I do so love film, and I do enjoy digital too. I get a kick out of all kinds of photography. It's word processor vs. calligraphy. Each can be beautiful.

Well, there's something we can agree fully with, with the exception that I am up to my sixth decade!

I think you're well sorted for the task(s) present and coming now that you have listed your equipment and it's not restricted to just 35mm (that is what I was worried about). BTW, The A2 is the EOS 5 here in Australia; I owned one for a good 20 years but it was blighted by repeated failures of the mode control dial on the top, broken lens release button and corroded display driver that caused fading out in cold conditions. My EOS 1N, bought at the same time, is still lively and kicking!

I get a kick out of all kinds of photography. It's word processor vs. calligraphy. Each can be beautiful.

This should be your signature!!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Well here goes.

I started photography back in '13 with a Soviet TLR a few rolls of Tmax 400 and no clue about anything whatsoever. I didn't even know what ISO was and spent a month trying to figure out what depth of field meant.

to understand what DOF means, you need to understand what a circle of confusion is and that is a bunch of photographers sitting around a table discussing DOF,

 

[Paul Howell]

I shoot both Minolta film and Sony digital, cropped and full frame. I also have Sigma digital bodies and Miranda and Pentax M42 and K mount bodies and lens, I also have MF and LF gear, none very new but all with good glass. I enjoy the darkroom more than fussing with Corel, what I shoot with depends on the circumstances and frankly my mood. Today I shot with my old Sigma SD 9 with M42 lens, 35mm, 28mm and 55mm, and converted all the images to monochrome. Tomorrow I'll take a Sony full frame body and Minolta 9 to the Phoenix Zoo for a traveling exhibit, Dinosaurs in the Desert.

 

[blockend]

I own the T2i/550D and the Canon 10-18mm, for just the scenarios you're talking about. However I don't recognise the latitude of film, vs blown highlights you're talking about. The good thing about digital cameras is you get instant feedback from the screen and can dial exposure up or down accordingly. For the kind of quotidian work you're describing that's invaluable.

You really don't want to be messing around in the edit for run of the mill stuff, just producing consistent jpegs that serve their purpose.

 

[Cholentpot]

I own the T2i/550D and the Canon 10-18mm, for just the scenarios you're talking about. However I don't recognise the latitude of film, vs blown highlights you're talking about. The good thing about digital cameras is you get instant feedback from the screen and can dial exposure up or down accordingly. For the kind of quotidian work you're describing that's invaluable.

You really don't want to be messing around in the edit for run of the mill stuff, just producing consistent jpegs that serve their purpose.

I floated the JPEG idea, I might mess with JPEG+RAW for the heck of it. If I get a handful of gigs I'll splurge for a 10-18.

Well, there's something we can agree fully with, with the exception that I am up to my sixth decade!

I think you're well sorted for the task(s) present and coming now that you have listed your equipment and it's not restricted to just 35mm (that is what I was worried about). BTW, The A2 is the EOS 5 here in Australia; I owned one for a good 20 years but it was blighted by repeated failures of the mode control dial on the top, broken lens release button and corroded display driver that caused fading out in cold conditions. My EOS 1N, bought at the same time, is still lively and kicking!


This should be your signature!!

Thanks for the compliment. It's the way I describe film to those that wonder why I still play with it.

As for the EOS 5/A2 I've read about the dial issue and am wary of it. I got it for less than a tune so I'll enjoy it while it lives. When it goes I'll nose around for another EOS body.

 

[Larry the sailor]

Take a look at Canons Refurb offerings on the Canon USA website, they can have some killer deals and if you aren't in too much of a hurry come Christmas shopping time they will have some serious low cost prices on good equipment.

 

[jim10219]

So here I go, film for fun, digital for business.

That's it right there! If I'm doing work for/as a business, I only consider the digital camera. 99.9% of Businesses don't care about the difference between film or digital. And of those that do, most probably prefer the HDR look of digital anyway. All they know is they want it to look decent, and they want it to be cheap. And if you want to make money off it (by not blowing your budget having to buy film, developer, and waste most of your time scanning), and give them consistent results (which is what Photoshop, chimping on in camera LCD screens, and the ability to shoot 10,000 exposures for the price of one are for), then digital is the only way to go.

And that's why hobbies exist. So you can do what you love with your life, and still make an honest living. I learned a long time ago that doing your hobby for a living isn't as great an idea as it sounds. In fact, it's a great way to lose your passion for it. Nothing takes the fun out of something more than having to choose between doing something that you know looks terrible and will be completely embarrassed by (because the customer is a stubborn idiot with no artistic eye) and declaring bankruptcy. So the moral of the story is, if you want to have your cake AND eat it too, then you have to bake two cakes.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

For me at least I think of all image making devices and materials as just tools. I use the one(s) that will work to produce the image I want. Sometimes it's digital and sometimes it's film. In my eyes they are equals in the tool chest.

Well, as many of you know, I was very, very deep into film photography and knew my way around the darkroom too. Now, after 15 years with digital, I must say, neither is easier, faster or cheaper but, I like the new challenges of digital and enjoy learning something new every day but film and the darkroom will forever be in my heartland soul.Now, if they just could give inkjet paper a tiny bit of that et fixer smell...

 

[Cholentpot]

That's it right there! If I'm doing work for/as a business, I only consider the digital camera. 99.9% of Businesses don't care about the difference between film or digital. And of those that do, most probably prefer the HDR look of digital anyway. All they know is they want it to look decent, and they want it to be cheap. And if you want to make money off it (by not blowing your budget having to buy film, developer, and waste most of your time scanning), and give them consistent results (which is what Photoshop, chimping on in camera LCD screens, and the ability to shoot 10,000 exposures for the price of one are for), then digital is the only way to go.

And that's why hobbies exist. So you can do what you love with your life, and still make an honest living. I learned a long time ago that doing your hobby for a living isn't as great an idea as it sounds. In fact, it's a great way to lose your passion for it. Nothing takes the fun out of something more than having to choose between doing something that you know looks terrible and will be completely embarrassed by (because the customer is a stubborn idiot with no artistic eye) and declaring bankruptcy. So the moral of the story is, if you want to have your cake AND eat it too, then you have to bake two cakes.

I've been holding off of doing paid photography for this reason. I love this hobby far too much to destroy it with annoyingnesses. I think by compartmentalizing digital and film I can keep it from ruining my hobby. Time will tell I guess.

 

[Cholentpot]

Well, as many of you know, I was very, very deep into film photography and knew my way around the darkroom too. Now, after 15 years with digital, I must say, neither is easier, faster or cheaper but, I like the new challenges of digital and enjoy learning something new every day but film and the darkroom will forever be in my heartland soul.Now, if they just could give inkjet paper a tiny bit of that et fixer smell...

Film has something deep that roots far far down. Digital is light and fluffy compared. I enjoy both but film resonates.

There is a joy of picking up a DSLR after shooting film for months and just going out and blasting loads of frames. It gets old quick but it's a nice feeling.

 

[Cholentpot]

Here's an update.

I bit the bullet and Amazoned a 10-18 for less than KEH or Canon refurb would have cost. It'll snail its way here and that's that. Big step for me, and I wish me luck.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Here's an update.

I bit the bullet and Amazoned a 10-18 for less than KEH or Canon refurb would have cost. It'll snail its way here and that's that. Big step for me, and I wish me luck.

If ever possible I would gladly pay more and buy from KEH or APUG classified knowing that any problems can be easily resolved.

 

[Cholentpot]

If ever possible I would gladly pay more and buy from KEH or APUG classified knowing that any problems can be easily resolved.

It was a significant difference. At least to me.

No tax, no shipping and lower overall price. It's a gamble I'm willing to take. Now if it was a L lens costing me 1k+ it would be a different story.

 

[rknewcomb]

"The reason for shooting digital is chiefly that the client wants the results NOW. Not in a day or tonight but NOW."

That is one of the main reasons digital exits.