What current 35mm film for vintage look?

[Pioneer]

Certainly trendland. Appropriate subject matter helps to set the tone.

Cliveh also pointed out an important part when he threw out toning. I was reminded that printing can also play a very big part.

I wonder also if the use of filters can help promote the vintage look. A green or a blue filter may create that orthochromatic look with today's films.

 

[trendland]

Certainly trendland. Appropriate subject matter helps to set the tone.

Cliveh also pointed out an important part when he threw out toning. I was reminded that printing can also play a very big part.

I wonder also if the use of filters can help promote the vintage look. A green or a blue filter may create that orthochromatic look with today's films.

Noting to say against camera filters (if it
is not to much and not to often)
Everything to say against filter apps wich
should give special looks.
with regards
PS : In color you can also create vintage
looks - for example an oldstyle 80th look
with cross processing.
But often this should be a look as a quote to a period as a kind of art.
In bw it is a little more compicate to reach this effect.

with regards

 

[Pioneer]

Noting to say against camera filters (if it
is not to much and not to often)
Everything to say against filter apps wich
should give special looks.
with regards
PS : In color you can also create vintage
looks - for example an oldstyle 80th look
with cross processing.
But often this should be a look as a quote to a period as a kind of art.
In bw it is a little more compicate to reach this effect.

with regards

I don't really have anything against those who are into digital and the tools that digital photography provides. For me it is all photography regardless of the capture method. I do find it interesting that a lot of tools used in digital post processing are used to mimic film processes.

Personally I do prefer working with more traditional materials and methods, and this certainly includes filters and the affect they provide. Where some find the digital post processing tools to be interesting I enjoy working with chemical methods to accomplish something repeatable. And truthfully, what many of us are doing are simply improvements that advanced photography way beyond what happened in the early days of our craft. We know longer have to use glass plates, we no longer have to apply our emulsions just prior to creating our negative. It is far easier now, just as digital is making much of the photographic process even easier still.

In the end, whether you use digital or analogue methods, you are just using tools to make your photograph communicate what you saw when you captured/recorded the scene or subject and, if you are lucky, a bit of the feeling involved as well. None of that is easy to do and requires a huge amount of craft, no matter which approach you take. For that reason, as much as any other, I have a huge amount of respect for any practitioner who prints a remarkable photograph that grabs, and keeps, my attention. And when I see that photograph, that beautiful print, I rarely ask myself whether it was done digitally or on film.

Obviously APUG is devoted to the analogue component of photography, and I love that. There are many, many other sites where I can get feedback for my digital side, not so many left that provide food for thought and input on the analogue side.

 

[Alan Johnson]

https://www.flickr.com/groups/efke/discuss/72157625920613374/
http://www.leefilters.com/architecture/arch-dl-col.html
It may be possible to get near Efke film results with some ingenuity.

 

[trendland]

I don't really have anything against those who are into digital and the tools that digital photography provides. For me it is all photography regardless of the capture method. I do find it interesting that a lot of tools used in digital post processing are used to mimic film processes.

Personally I do prefer working with more traditional materials and methods, and this certainly includes filters and the affect they provide. Where some find the digital post processing tools to be interesting I enjoy working with chemical methods to accomplish something repeatable. And truthfully, what many of us are doing are simply improvements that advanced photography way beyond what happened in the early days of our craft. We know longer have to use glass plates, we no longer have to apply our emulsions just prior to creating our negative. It is far easier now, just as digital is making much of the photographic process even easier still.

In the end, whether you use digital or analogue methods, you are just using tools to make your photograph communicate what you saw when you captured/recorded the scene or subject and, if you are lucky, a bit of the feeling involved as well. None of that is easy to do and requires a huge amount of craft, no matter which approach you take. For that reason, as much as any other, I have a huge amount of respect for any practitioner who prints a remarkable photograph that grabs, and keeps, my attention. And when I see that photograph, that beautiful print, I rarely ask myself whether it was done digitally or on film.

Obviously APUG is devoted to the analogue component of photography, and I love that. There are many, many other sites where I can get feedback for my digital side, not so many left that provide food for thought and input on the analogue side.

I saw a nice picture on a photo site.
Palm beach (streetphoto) it looks like from the past.I have had only a short look
on it - it was named as "cross processing".
I asked about the camera because a little
vignitation indicates an older stuff in 6x9
because I made simular pictures with my
Voigtländer at 7,7 with full opened lens.
What I got was a link to a software side.
The photographer stated that it is developed as cross processing.
So it was stated on the side : developed (with software)???.....

I asked my assistent if he is working also
with bw - the answer was : "More and more ..I like bw very much - all last shootings were just in bw"
That was an important concern to me because I was informed about his new cameras (Nikon D800 / Pentax Me Super)....
And I asked him what bw film he has used - after this I should ask him about
developement because he should be able to do this in darkroom.
The answer was : "No bw I shot just with my Nikon D800 - all was done at home with Lightroom... "
But he can't shot bw digital?He is allways
shooting in color - and a bw motive he can't shape from color shots some days later - designed without color...
Not my way - sorry about.

with regards