For me it is the immediacy, the sophistication of control in capture and development, less reliance on other services. Reduced cost is a byproduct of those factors, an added bonus. The direct adaptation of foundational principles of exposure (light capture: SS/f/ISO/color) from film to digital capture changes the role of film from foundational to circumstantial, simply one of many.Hmmm, cheaper, easier, more convenient. Sounds better to me. Plus, better quality (especially in high ISOs),
Hang on to it: it may become collectable.
I have a D70 donated to the department, hardly used. I spent an evening watching TV and running it through its paces.The D70 is a perfectly wonderful camera except for the small LCD screen.
Hmmm, cheaper, easier, more convenient. Sounds better to me. Plus, better quality (especially in high ISOs),
That said, how long will it take for our film-based/silver-based method will be considered an alternative process?That's great for you but I print in alt processes, such as carbon, kallitype, and gum. Better quality? Subjective... and just your opinion.
Gelatin silver prints were considered an alternative process for the massive alternative process photography exhibit at the Lonsdale Gallery at the Photrio Symposium organized by Bob Carnie in Toronto this past summer. Surprising perhaps, but I think it reflects today's reality. Despite the posturing around here, how many members actually have a darkroom and regularly make wet prints.That said, how long will it take for our film-based/silver-based method will be considered an alternative process?
Depends on who you ask. I've been of that mind for a few years.That said, how long will it take for our film-based/silver-based method will be considered an alternative process?
I do. (Also been on this forum for almost 15 years ...)Gelatin silver prints were considered an alternative process for the massive alternative process photography exhibit at the Lonsdale Gallery at the Photrio Symposium organized by Bob Carnie in Toronto this past summer. Surprising perhaps, but I think it reflects today's reality. Despite the posturing around here, how many members actually have a darkroom and regularly make wet prints.
I do too, but I can't tell you have many times I read posts from members who have haven't had a darkroom for years, if ever. And when it was still APUG, there was a special exemption from the no digital talk rule for scanning because that's what members were doing with their film.I do. (Also been on this forum for almost 15 years ...)
That said, how long will it take for our film-based/silver-based method will be considered an alternative process?
I have a D70 donated to the department, hardly used. I spent an evening watching TV and running it through its paces.The D70 is a perfectly wonderful camera except for the small LCD screen.
I do.how many members actually have a darkroom and regularly make wet prints.
does using the sun count ?how many members actually have a darkroom and regularly make wet prints
I hear you. I get these cameras donated to help students who can't afford cameras. I am struck with a lack of flexibility in many shooters who only want the very best. The D70 was wonderful for 4 subsequent students, 2 of which went on to buy their own, more contemporary, cameras.
The flipping mirror of SLRs solved a viewing preference; seeing from the perspective of the lens. Between that, the meter, and the what eye sees we could make interpretations and predictions of what we might capture. Mirrorless cameras and e-viewing now address the perspective part but new skills of interpretation of histograms and LCD views, just as we used to do with polaroid as a preview, must be learned.I think mirrorless does turn an important corner and doubt anybody's going to keep making DSLRs.
I use the same skills to frame and expose film as I do for mirrorless digital images. What are these new skills you refer too.The flipping mirror of SLRs solved a viewing preference; seeing from the perspective of the lens. Between that, the meter, and the what eye sees we could make interpretations and predictions of what we might capture. Mirrorless cameras and e-viewing now address the perspective part but new skills of interpretation of histograms and LCD views, just as we used to do with polaroid as a preview, must be learned.
Viewing perspective is the same as with (D)SLRs.I use the same skills to frame and expose film and I do for mirrorless digital images. What skills have I yet to learn?
Perhaps I adapt easily. I do not find going back and forth between an SLR and mirrorless difficult. I have been using an SLR since 1973; I didn't take up digital until 2014.Viewing perspective is the same as with (D)SLRs.
But with the mirrorless cameras, the viewing screens/electronic viewfinders give a very different presentation of what we see before we photograph compared to a prism and/or ground glass based system.
Just as I have to change and adapt when I try using a traditional view camera ground glass or make regular use of my waist level finder equipped cameras, I find I have to change and adapt when I use the back screen or electronic viewfinder on my new mirrorless.
So far, I get more predictable results with the older technology, but I have decades of using that technology behind me, while my mirrorless experience is less than a year old.
I don't recall thinking much past my meter and contrast for film. I got good predictable and printable stuff. On set I used to use Polaroid 664-665 mostly as a check that everything was working and a 2-d abstract that helped with composition. My digital workflow now includes LCD preview and histograms. Sometimes I'll import a file from the SDHC card while still on set, look at it in Lightroom, and then make fine adjustments in focus, exposure, color and Dof after previewing on my 27" iMac screen. It makes the original file pretty sweet and the results of further development more precise. It is akin to seeing a nice print of what one is shooting; why would one not use such a flow and skillset? Maybe people like to say, look ma, no hands. The only thing that matters is the result.I use the same skills to frame and expose film as I do for mirrorless digital images. What are these new skills you refer too.
I use the same skills to frame and expose film as I do for mirrorless digital images. What are these new skills you refer too.
For me, mirrorless brings incredible light weight portability (far beyond any film camera or dslr) to extremely high image quality (detail, tones etc). And it brings previsualization back to the fore: I study the subject outside the camera, like I did with B&W LF, because my processing is integral to the result. Minor and Ansel would both like that. When I shot my beloved Ektachrome the job was done with a click but shooting digital the job is done in the darkroom (so to speak). I simplified my digital post-processing tremendously with Lightroom, and further with NIK.
If I was delivering files to clients my game would have to change, but I don't do that.
So this is a mirrorless camera too:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?