Shooting more than you can print?

Ko.Fe. · Dec 17, 2015

I just finished print. Two prints to mail to Alberta per request. And six prints from negatives I received from the owner of particular lens. I don't have same lens and wanted to see prints from it.

Usually, I have some street to print, but not so often. Some portraits for family album, some snapshots from local events. Some trees...

I only take picture on bw film if I want to print it. To me it is one 135 roll per one-three weeks.
I print about ten frames from each roll.

If I don't want to print, but would like to take picture, it is taken digitally. I have some cine film and slides, but use it only once in a while.

NB23 · Dec 17, 2015

For the past 7 years now I've been working on this. I print all my best stuff from each and every negative I shot, ever. 20x24 fb, 11x14 fb, 8x10fb. All selenium toned. All stacked into boxes.

Quite a few very fine images in there.

I do this because I am a purist. And because I'd be extremely stupid to be owning all this fine and expensive equipment, shoot like a moron and never print. What would be the purpose of that?

Do you see musicians play air guitar? I rest my case.

Mick Fagan · Dec 17, 2015

I contact print everything I shoot, usually I work in either 135 or 4x5 format, almost never the two together. This enables one to concentrate more properly on the job at hand.

Last year a three month holiday in Europe, Germany/Spain/Germany using 135 format. Contact sheets done, marked with Chinagraph then prints made, all 360 + of them. The end result is a nice album with around 125 final prints selected.

Film developing took one week, contact printing took one day, and selecting enlargements were decided upon over a couple of weeks. Final printing took 16 days in the darkroom.

I then ventured out and shot some 4x5 stuff and more or less stayed with that for most of the next 3 months.

This year a three month trip in Australia, 4x5 exclusively. Developing of the film took 1 week. Contact sheets done in a day, and selecting enlargements were decided upon over a couple of weeks. Final printing was half done in one week, remainder still happening.

I had a 135 shoot of mother and daughter, very successful. Film developed in two days, contact sheets, two sets one for them one for myself, one day. One week later 53-55 prints ordered, these were printed in four darkroom days in a 1½ week period.

Currently getting ready to print the remainder of the Australian trip undertaken earlier this year during the summer months when we have plenty of sunshine. Then the solar panels on the house rooftop pay for all the electricity, including the roller transport paper processor and the air conditioning unit.

Retirement has to have some benefits.

I dont have an electronic camera, although my telephone has one, I need either a niece or nephew to guide me through the process.

Mick.

Patrick Robert James · Dec 17, 2015

Like most people I store everything in Lightroom to more easily keep track of images and organize them. I have every image I ever shot scanned. I keep a collection of images I have never printed that I would like to and right now it numbers 560.

One thing using Lightroom has done for me in the decade or so it has been out is refine what I spend my time doing. Printing a cohesive set of images is more important to me now than just printing the images I like. It makes the time I spend in the darkroom more productive and worthwhile.

And no, I will never print all 560 of those images. Ain't ever gonna happen. Well maybe if I get an inkjet and a wad of cash.... Nah, I'll stick with silver. Maybe if I get a minion and a wad of cash...

RalphLambrecht · Dec 17, 2015

I got to the pointof only shooting it if I'm convinced i want to print it

removed account4 · Dec 17, 2015

i always shoot more than i print, no way not to ..
if one is stingy with film you might not see somethng you want
film, processing and printing are cheap compared to the effort it takes to
be present and make a photograph ...
yes, i shoot LF too, and i expose lots and lots of 4x5 / 5x7 film
and paper negatives upto 11x14, no point NOT TO, no point holding on to
film and not exposing it, the point of having a camera and film is to use it ...
i use electronic means to see what i expose sometimes, and make prints of what i want
and i don't get rid of anything ... cause sometimes 10-30 years later you look at a negative
and finally understand why it was you made the exposure and it is a beautiful thing.

destroya · Dec 17, 2015

I have the same issue. with the water shortage I have limited my enlarging sessions to twice a year. I still shoot film so there are many rolls to look at. I find the biggest drag is doing 80+ contact sheets before I really decide which negs to enlarge. and because I usually only have two weeks in my sessions and only a few hours within the few days I enlarge to work in the dark room, time is limited. what Ive found is that my enlarged quality has suffered as I push myself to get more negs enlarged, going for quantity over quality. Not that they are bad, I just do more straight prints with minimal dodging and burning than working on 1 print for many hours at a time. hopefully the amount of snow we have gotten can change that! heading to yosemite on sunday for a day trip. They and tahoe seem to have more snow before x-mas this year than in the last 10! more great negs to enlarge now (or at least I hope).

markbarendt · Dec 17, 2015

Carriage said:
Largely just in a photo album.

That's cool.

For me the negatives typically work as my "proofs", I can even use them to share. If it's 35mm that may require a loop, for larger formats it's easier.

The grand majority of the shots I take will never be printed, and I'm fine with that because I'm not after "snap-shots", a shot needs to stand out pretty good before I'll consider printing it. If I get 1-3 standouts from a week of shooting here and there I'm happy.

Shooting a lot and printing a little is normal. The question is simply how you weed through the junk in the middle.

Ansel Adams was happy with a crop of 12 new good negatives a year. He shot more than that.

National Geographic photographers are nearly legendary in the volume of shots to prints, I've heard of them shooting 20,000ish to get 20 that finally get printed in the magazine. They proofed (back in the day) all the developed rolls each night hunting for the best, weeding out the rest.

Henri Cartier-Bresson shot many, many, many thousands to get a few hundred in his lifetime.

The people around us are typically less picky than these examples. That doesn't mean we should be.

hoffy · Dec 17, 2015

Poisson Du Jour said:
Only snapshooters, not photographers, rattle through roll upon roll upon roll of film (seemingly under the guise of "this will save film", to use the terribly common line from carnival barkers) and then file the resulting pics away never to see the light of day nary a print a scan or something to be proud of, just hundreds and hundreds of rolls of ... nothing. I have seen far, far too much of this. I print each of my images from 120 film, then sell them.

Wow! I better pack it all away, as I am obviously wasting my time with my photography.

Sirius Glass · Dec 17, 2015

I process as I shoot so I rarely get a back log. The most frequent situation that causes a back log for me is going on vacation, but I soon catch up on that.

Vaughn · Dec 17, 2015

wildbill said:
I have binders full of women.

Hard to believe that one would actually long for past Presidential elections...

---

I'll keep exposing film -- I got to have something to print when I get too old to haul the 8x10 or the 11x14 around!

munz6869 · Dec 17, 2015

I love snapping away, and some of the negatives I print. No stress.

Marc!

Jim Jones · Dec 17, 2015

Evaluating negatives and noting which have promise saves the bother of contact prints or scans. This becomes easy with a little practice.

markbarendt · Dec 17, 2015

Jim Jones said:
Evaluating negatives and noting which have promise saves the bother of contact prints or scans. This becomes easy with a little practice.

Yep

bence8810 · Dec 17, 2015

Jim Jones said:
Evaluating negatives and noting which have promise saves the bother of contact prints or scans. This becomes easy with a little practice.

I just can't judge by looking at a 35mm negative image on a light table whether i'd like it in reality or not. I can see the composition sure, but I can't quite see the full "picture". When I turn it into a positive (scanning), it all comes together.
Maybe just lack of experience on my end, I shot my first roll just 2 years ago in 2013 Dec.

Ben

John51 · Dec 18, 2015

Carriage said:
For people that wet print, what do you do when you're shooting at a faster rate than you can print? At this stage I'm thinking that I continue to use film for my street photography but for virtually everything else use digital. The big things that I find are delaying me are setting and packing up my temporary dark room as well as at times inconsistent exposures (due to not using a meter) such that I can't always do a bunch of "good enough" prints based off one set of test strips. However, I still think I'd be restricted at some point. When I shot a bit of C41 and got it scanned at the lab it's obviously quicker but feels like I should just go digital if I'm doing that.

Thoughts or ideas?

What I would do in your case is have one darkroom session just for making contact prints. Enlarger height and time constant for all of them.

That way, anything that looks ok on the contact print will be an easy print at the same enlarger height and time. So the next session, you can make lots of 10x8s from the 'good' negs very quickly.

ic-racer · Dec 18, 2015

The other way around is just as bad. That is, printing the same negatives over and over. That was the case when I started 8x10.

Vaughn · Dec 18, 2015

Jim Jones said:
Evaluating negatives and noting which have promise saves the bother of contact prints or scans. This becomes easy with a little practice.

Yep...of course working with negatives up to 11x14 makes it even easier (IMO).

hoffy · Dec 18, 2015

I have to admit, I religiously contacted printed every neg that I produced. But in the end, I found I could easily judge a negative by looking at it (& scanning....), so I stopped years ago. I find making contact sheets a waste of time and a bit tedious.

HiHoSilver · Dec 18, 2015

to the orig. question - Does Raggedy Ann have a cotton cleavage?
...more than I can scan 'til the DR is set up.

MDR · Dec 19, 2015

You and everyone else will always be behind with printing wether they use film or a digicam. But that's a good thing as it gives you time to think about the shoot.

Kilgallb · Dec 31, 2015

I have made a New Years resolution every year for ten years that this is the year I put the tripod down 100 times and produce at least 20 prints. So far I have never achieved my goal. I got close this year , 75 times and about 15 decent prints. I shoot 4x5.

I left photography for a few years after realizing I shot lots of images (35mm) but not much good stuff. Moving to large format has been way more satisfying now that I concentrate on a few good images.

OptiKen · Dec 31, 2015

Nope. I wish I had that problem. My problem is shooting more than I would want to print. I want to shoot more that are print-worthy

Shooting more than you can print?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency