Anybody else still using film cameras?

[PapaZita]

Just FWIW, I wasn't being facetious there about the processing. If you're enthusiastic about film and you haven't tried D&P from first principles (and first principles is not a daylight tank!), you've definitely missed something out.

I am interested in experimenting with the processing. I don't think I can achieve the necessary level of darkness at the kitchen sink, but I do have a plan involving the downstairs toilet. I just need to get around to it. I'm particularly interested in learning more about the chemistry, having discovered that film really can be developed in a mixture of instant coffee and washing soda. As far as I know I don't have a substitute fixer lurking in the kitchen cupboards, although I hear that seawater was once used...

PZ.

 

[Andy in Sig]

Coffee and washing soda???!!!

Well at least you wouldn't have to bother with sepia toning.

It must be simpler to invest in a small developing tank, a changing bag, some HP5 and a bottle of DDX to develop it in along with stop bath and some fixer.

 

[tyred]

Regular film user here and currently getting my own darkroom set up in my spare time (I used to be able to use the one in the local college but I can't any more as my "friendly" security guard has retired). I love black and white film. I often use a digital camera for snapshots and the like but use one of several fully manual 35mm SLRs when I want to have fun. I have also been known to play and experiment with single use cameras. Work within their limitations and they can take excellent photos. Sheldon Brown was also a fan of these.

I don't dismiss digital photography and can appreciate it's advantages but I enjoy film so much more, especially processing the B&W film and I like slide film for landscapes. The trouble with normal 35mm colour negative film is finding someone who can process it properly. Most places on the high street still do it, but do it badly. The local Boots is a joke.

On a boat trip last year on Loch Ness, I got chatting to a very nice American girl who was also shooting film with a manual SLR, so it made me realise there is also a friendly aspect among the declining film fans.

 

[pepecat]

Have a Canon AE1 from 1980 something which i use now and again. It does take great photos, but fim processing is so flippin expensive, that I generally resort to ye newe fangled digital thing.

 

[Hover Fly]

I got a new film camera for Xmas. I love the glow of a well exposed tranny.

 

[mightyquin]

I'm a very keen photographer. I'm an amateur but have done the odd paid job, catalogue product shots, weddings, that sort of thing.

I use film for about 80% of my photography. I've got a decent Canon digital SLR but just prefer the look of film images, and prefer using my film cameras (Leica and Bronica mostly plus a few others).

YES YOU CAN STILL BUY FILM, STILL GET IT PROCESSED, STILL DEVELOP IT YOURSELF!!!!! Sorry to shout but the message needs to get through!

I used to do all my own processing and printing, but now I process my own B&W film, then scan it. Colour and E6 I leave to the local lab. Did you know, you can process a film in coffee? (edit just noted post further up!).

Digital is handy when you need quick results, when you know the image is only going to be used on the web, when you are being paid to take some photos and want to keep overheads down..... but for personal use I just don't get the same satisfaction from digital images as I do from film. Plenty of people feel the other way and it's simply a personal preference. It's like preferring an oil painting instead of a sketch, or rock music instead of jazz.

I personally think that interest in film photography is growing again after declining year on year. Occassional snappers will always stick to their digicams, or more likely phone cams now, but anyone who is enthusiastic about photography will use film at some point.

Also remember that many blockbuster movies are still shot on film. They use far more of the stuff than us still photographers ever will!

 

[mightyquin]

Here's a link to some of my shots from last years London to Brighton veteran car rally, taken on a 1903 Kodak box camera, same kind of age as the cars!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36227452@N00/sets/72157622661635047/

 

[Coco]

I did dust my Bronica down a few months back, but that's as far as it got. I simply don't have the time to do the processing side of it anymore.

Funny you should mention the Olympus. What has really got me back into photography is the EPL1. By having a much smaller distance between the lens and the sensor, you can get cheap adapters which allow you to use any old (and new) SLR lenses on the camera. All the joys of manual focussing and aperture control without the messy film bit. And some of the old lenses are a real bargain. IIRC I got a 135mm 2.8 for about £40. Well worth a try with the EP1.

 

[Maverick Goose]

Have a look at APUG.org. Digital isn't the only way-I respect it as another tool but I'm more than happy with film and have no intention of changing!

 

[danphoto]

but anyone who is enthusiastic about photography will use film at some point.

Unless of course they're professionals. If you replaced "anyone who is" with "many amateurs who are", I'd agree with you.

And just for the record, I'm a long-time amateur turned professional who's retired so is once again an amateur - which reminds me of that awesome quote attributed to Edward Weston ...

Photography to the amateur is recreation. To the professional it is work, and hard work too, no matter how pleasurable it my be.

 

[ttcycle]

Photography to the amateur is recreation. To the professional it is work, and hard work too, no matter how pleasurable it my be.

oh yes tell me about - slog, slog, slog!!!

 

[skudupnorth]

I have a Nikon FM2 and and F3 which i love.I have stopped using them more for ease of digital and the fact it is harder to get film developed ( i prefer Kodachrome which you have to send to Switzerland now ! )
I always compare film to old records...it's not brilliant,but there is something pure about the image.
This thread has made me re-think about getting the old girls out again.One thing that used to make me laugh from the digital crowd was the "how do you focus/choose correct settings" ect,ect ! They have lost the true art of photography with the point and shoot technology.
Great thread

 

[avalon]

Another Olympus OM1 user here. Great fun to use and it sometimes arouses curiosity from other camera users, making it a great conversation starter.

 

[danphoto]

One thing that used to make me laugh from the digital crowd was the "how do you focus/choose correct settings" ect,ect ! They have lost the true art of photography with the point and shoot technology.

Well, popular photography has been based on point 'n' shoot since the end of the 19th Century but more to the point, I'm not at all sure what "the true art of photography" is.

In the context of mastering focus and particularly exposure , though, don't forget that traditionally most photographers whether amateur or professional relied on both the latitude of the film and the skill of the lab doing their processing. They may not have realised that, or if they did, cared to admit it, but the fact remains - as will be confirmed by talking to anybody who worked in a lab or ran a minilab before 2004/5.

ETA - as used to be said in pre-digital days, the fundamental difference between a professional photographer and an amateur is that the former has a bigger waste bin.

 

[tyred]

What I like about a film in a way is it's permanence. I love looking at old black and white photos from 50+ years ago, especially of areas I know and seeing what has/hasn't changed. When film was king, many people took photos, got them processed and probably stuffed them in a drawer somewhere and never looked at them again, but they remained for future generations to find. It provides a nice archive. If you note early family photos almost always showed people in their Sunday best as getting a photo took was time consuming and expensive c1900 and people liked to look their best.

With digital making things easier and cheaper, and there are so many people with cameras shooting all sorts of things on a daily basis, I do wonder how many of those will survive like film prints do. I suspect most people take photos, copy them on to their PC hard disk or Flickr or whatever and never have them printed. Most probably never back up their PC hard disk. When the PC packs up, those photos will be gone forever.

I find it interesting that the man who showed me how to develop my own photos is a professional wedding photographer who made the switch to digital and says given a choice, he would go back to film. The reason is nothing to do with image quality or anything like that; he is sick of spending time on Photoshop on request from the fat bride who will insist he does that to make her look thinner in her wedding portrait! Or to remove a spot from her chin, or some other vain nonsense. With film, he could turn around and say "tough shoot but that's what you look like!" Personally, I think editing photos like this is stupid.