Urban Outfitters catalogs shot with film

[Derek Lofgreen]

I don't know if this has been discussed here yet, I did a quick search and didn't find anything on it yet. But in the March issue of PDN there is an article in it called "Art and Commerce" that disuses how Urban Outfitters only shoots film for their catalogs. The Art Director Joanna Ewing says that a shooting digital has a "stilting" effect on the shoot. I thought that was an interesting point of view. Did anyone else here read it?

My thoughts are on my blog post

D.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Proves again that film is hip, even though it's not dominant.

I shot my latest portrait assignment on film, and there's that "done" feeling that I find important after shooting. Nobody is bothering you to see what the results are, they have to trust you. I also have to trust myself and my equipment. With studio strobes, a sync mistake would be catastrophic and irrecoverable. But knowing that I can pull it off without a hitch, I always feel proud.

 

[Robert Hall]

I think that's a huge part of using film is the ownership we feel when we have a finished product in our hands.

I push those who come to me as students to produce work on paper because it's the finished product that holds the value of something accomplished.

 

[benjiboy]

I notice much to my amusement that several of the covers of the Digital photography magazines are shot on large format film.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

I don't know what kind of stilting effect it can have, its product photography for christ's sake! That in itself is stilting, lol. Shooting film ain't gonna make it any more fun.

 

[Derek Lofgreen]

Well, I think her point of view is that when ever one shot was taken then everyone had to look at that capture before another one could be made. I can see how that would cramp the flow. They sell clothes too, so there are models involved with some of the shoots.

D.

 

[peri24]

i think the decision of Joanna Ewing for shooting film is not hip at all!!
As she and we know, shooting film in productions these days is so much more painful from client/model/makeup-artist point of view, always looking for an instant feedback. That if you are still shooting film those times is because you really are "strong" and believe in the medium.
I've seen quite a few photographers that loving and shooting film for ages change to digital for commercial work. That's what i really think is hype, follow rules that you don't believe or like, forgetting things that were so obvious 4 years ago and believing the cheap and easy promises of digital. If just half of the professional photographers would not have been so afraid we still would have plenty of films to shoot with.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

I notice much to my amusement that several of the covers of the Digital photography magazines are shot on large format film.

The US magazine "Outdoor Photographer" (??? - or a magazine of a similar name) used to have nothing but LF and MF color nature shots illustrating articles that were 100% digital - to go with the 100% digital advertising content.

They didn't hide it, for each photo there was a caption: "Toyo 45AX, 210 Apo Sironar W, Ektachrome 100"; "Pentax 67, 65mm Takumar, Velvia 50". Not one photo was captioned "Nikon D300" or "Canon EOS-1D" although that's all the articles drooled over.

 

[hspluta]

I am wondering if they are using digital to set-up the shot, balance lighting, find the DOF, etc. Then switching to film to capture the final image. This would give them the convenience and instant feedback, but still allow the final quality of film.

Best, -Harry

 

[Ektagraphic]

Interesting to know...I wonder what cameras and film that they are using....

 

[Derek Lofgreen]

The article says they use freelance photographers, so the gear would be what ever the shooter uses I guess.

D.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Pretty brave shooting catalogs without Polaroid

I worked on commercial shoots during film days and I wouldn't complete a shot with the art director without proofing with Polaroids first. I guess the photogs that shoot for Urban Outfitters are way better these days. I'm wondering if they proof digitally now? But digital is what caused the demise of Polaroid

Here's the link to the PDN article:

http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_display/esearch/e3iedf10d16b35b1c7a1dcb48bfd484a296?pn=3

 

[Prest_400]

The US magazine "Outdoor Photographer" (??? - or a magazine of a similar name) used to have nothing but LF and MF color nature shots illustrating articles that were 100% digital - to go with the 100% digital advertising content.

They didn't hide it, for each photo there was a caption: "Toyo 45AX, 210 Apo Sironar W, Ektachrome 100"; "Pentax 67, 65mm Takumar, Velvia 50". Not one photo was captioned "Nikon D300" or "Canon EOS-1D" although that's all the articles drooled over.

Yes, one of those. I remember that KR pointed that various times, he said something like this: "the cover shot was shot with velvia even though everything is digital"; It's really ironic.

Well, even though it may be a hipster thing, it's nice that they use film, keeps it going.
Talking about catalogs, I remember to read somewhere that most food product photography is/was done on film, because it looks more pleasing.

 

[peri24]

I am wondering if they are using digital to set-up the shot, balance lighting, find the DOF, etc. Then switching to film to capture the final image. This would give them the convenience and instant feedback, but still allow the final quality of film.

What!?!
for setting up a shot and frame it you just need your eyes to look what's in front and looking thru the lens before pressing the shutter. For balancing lights, getting light ratios a lightmeter and still your eyes, and to find the adequate DOF you just press that DOF that almost all camera have. When everything is set perfectly you just shoot a pola or a fuji to check it out with the team and then start the action. Why would anyone need a digital camera for that? that's how megatons of photographers have been working for ages! i can't believe how fast people forget things!

 

[rphenning]

thomas prior shot some stuff for them. he uses a mamiya 7 and a canon 1ds.

http://thomasprior.blogspot.com/

probably my favorite photographer.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I love to hear about those ariticles!

Jeff

 

[Joe VanCleave]

Urban Outfitters also sells a line of "toy" cameras in store, along with film.

~Joe

 

[cfclark]

Urban Outfitters also sells a line of "toy" cameras in store, along with film.

~Joe

I was going to say, they do carry lomo cameras and film...not that I, uh, spend much time in Urban Outfitters.

 

[hspluta]

What!?!
for setting up a shot and frame it you just need your eyes to look what's in front and looking thru the lens before pressing the shutter. For balancing lights, getting light ratios a lightmeter and still your eyes, and to find the adequate DOF you just press that DOF that almost all camera have. When everything is set perfectly you just shoot a pola or a fuji to check it out with the team and then start the action. Why would anyone need a digital camera for that? that's how megatons of photographers have been working for ages! i can't believe how fast people forget things!

Simple, Polaroids cost per shot, digital is a reusable commodity.

 

[peri24]

Simple, Polaroids cost per shot, digital is a reusable commodity.

i can't imagine any professional who can't spend 2 packs of fuji, polaroid or whatever instant film for shooting session. These are hard times, but bro, that's tops 30$ of film, if the gig is paid it covers that and much more. If you are shooting digital will you show pictures to people with a 3"lcd of your camera? will you move the camera off your tripod and ruin the composition? or will you let the poor back of your client break to see that tiny lcd? no... no..., you will need that fancy 24" monitor to show your work.
Polaroids can move from hand to hand, can be lay down in a table to make selections, can be sent, a client can keep them in the pocket, without any cost, zero! in order to do that with digital technology there is a huge amount of hardware and software involved.
Digital has so many many multiple hidden costs that don't look obvious at the beginning that i could be on and on for hours.

 

[peri24]

i'm woooondering what the heck i'm doing.....
defending analog photography against digital in apug :confused::confused::confused:

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I am sure that for Urban Outfitters film costs are trivial compared to models, the photographer, assistants, stylists, lighting, transportation, catering, post-production and everything else that goes into that kind of a shoot.

 

[viridari]

I am wondering if they are using digital to set-up the shot, balance lighting, find the DOF, etc. Then switching to film to capture the final image. This would give them the convenience and instant feedback, but still allow the final quality of film.

I've found this approach to be very useful in my own work. I use a G11 like a Polaroid and then switch to the C330 when I'm using studio monolights.