35mm film photography comeback?

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Cursitor Doom, Apr 5, 2014.

  1. Cursitor Doom

    PeterN Guest

    On 4/6/2014 8:09 AM, nospam wrote:

    And artists, professional art teachers, who are teaching artistic
    vision. etc. I know several of them who also serve as beta testers for
    Adobe.
     
    PeterN, Apr 7, 2014
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Cursitor Doom

    PeterN Guest

    Did you expect anything else?
     
    PeterN, Apr 7, 2014
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Cursitor Doom

    PeterN Guest

    This is not about film vs digital. It's about film as a tool for
    teaching art photography. Stop twisting.
     
    PeterN, Apr 7, 2014
    #43
  4. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    that's my point.

    it's old farts who are stuck in the past. they like film because it's
    what they used long ago. it's nostalgia.

    it's not because of any quality advantage.
     
    Guest, Apr 7, 2014
    #44
  5. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    of course it is a parameter.

    the problem is you can't change it per shot with roll film.
     
    Guest, Apr 7, 2014
    #45
  6. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    Actually, ISO in digital has NOTHING to do with exposure.[/QUOTE]

    yes it most certainly does. it can be changed per shot, either manually
    or with auto-iso, which is *incredibly* useful.

    pentax even has a mode for it, called tav, where you set aperture &
    shutter speed and the camera changes the iso, as appropriate.

    with film, you can't change the iso, other than by altering the
    processing which affects the entire roll and may not be an option
    anyway. you *can't* change it per shot.
    the only amusing thing is your insistence that film is better.
     
    Guest, Apr 7, 2014
    #46
  7. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    i'm not twisting anything. if you want to teach someone photography,
    then do so with digital because it's not only more practical but it's
    also much easier.

    teach the student what they need to know in the modern world, not what
    their grandparents did.
     
    Guest, Apr 7, 2014
    #47
  8. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    there's nothing bullshit about it. it's easier to teach photography
    with digital and more practical too.

    i see you have nothing to refute what i said and resorting to your
    usual ad hominems.
     
    Guest, Apr 7, 2014
    #48
  9. It isn't an *exposure* parameter with a digital camera
    either.

    Exposure is how many photons are allowed to hit the
    sensor. The only two parameters are shutter time and
    lens aperture.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Apr 7, 2014
    #49
  10. yes it most certainly does. it can be changed per shot, either manually
    or with auto-iso, which is *incredibly* useful.

    pentax even has a mode for it, called tav, where you set aperture &
    shutter speed and the camera changes the iso, as appropriate.

    with film, you can't change the iso, other than by altering the
    processing which affects the entire roll and may not be an option
    anyway. you *can't* change it per shot.[/QUOTE]

    With digital the only way to change ISO is with altered processing
    too. It has nothing to do with exposure, it has to do with processing
    the data.
    Equally hilarous; each of you.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Apr 7, 2014
    #50
  11. Cursitor Doom

    Whiskers Guest

    Perhaps he changes the weather by changing his hat?
     
    Whiskers, Apr 7, 2014
    #51
  12. Cursitor Doom

    Whiskers Guest

    Actually, you can. The 'best' way is to use interchangeable 'backs' on
    your camera body - or carry more than one body. Less conveniently,
    change the film roll or cassette - wastes the unused frames, but if it
    means getting the shots you want then you'll do it. You could of course
    use a 'changing bag' and scissors and spare spools or cassettes to
    rescue the unused frames, but it's a lot of faff and probably not worth
    it unless film is very scarce - and you have lots of scope for wrecking
    a lot of images.

    Shooting in monochrome, there are 'multispeed' films such as Ilford XP
    which can be rated at anything from ISO 50 to ISO 800 for different
    shots on the same roll (and processed alongside colour negative film in
    standard C41 chemistry).
     
    Whiskers, Apr 7, 2014
    #52
  13. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    that's a narrow definition which leads you to the wrong conclusion.

    there are 3 inputs for a given result: shutter speed, f/stop and iso.
    changing any one of them affects the other two.

    you could do that with sheet film where you had one exposure per piece
    of film with its own individual processing. ansel adams took advantage
    of that.

    however, you can't do that with roll film because every shot must have
    the same iso per roll.

    <http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/Article/h7ruii10/understan
    ding-auto-iso.html>
    A photographic exposure is dependent upon three variables: aperture,
    shutter speed and ISO. For photographers shooting film, the aperture
    and shutter speed might have changed from frame to frame, but ISO was
    always a constant‹at least until you finished the rest of the roll of
    film (and at 24 or 36 exposures that was usually a ways away).

    Skip ahead to digital‹and now, not only can you change the shutter
    speed and aperture with each image, but you can also change the
    ISO‹on the fly‹for each image you shoot. This is a great convenience
    when you¹re shooting under constantly changing lighting conditions,
    such as when you¹re going from indoors to outside, or if the sky is
    partially cloudy or if you¹re shooting in the shadows and then going
    into bright sunlight.
     
    Guest, Apr 7, 2014
    #53
  14. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    Actually, you can. The 'best' way is to use interchangeable 'backs' on
    your camera body - or carry more than one body.[/QUOTE]

    that's not changing it per shot. that's changing the entire camera or
    its back and you're still stuck at whatever iso the rest of the roll
    was. plus, it's very inconvenient and will result in missed shots.

    with digital, you can set the shutter speed, f/stop iso differently for
    every shot at any time, and with any of the automatic modes, any or all
    of them can adjust on the fly at whatever frame rate the camera can do.

    sure, lots of people did that, including myself. i also switched from
    daylight to tungsten film or had two cameras, one for indoors and one
    for outdoors. what a pain in the ass that was. who wants to go back to
    that nonsense.

    with digital, one can get the shots a whole lot easier, including the
    missed shots when switching films.

    and even if you do switch rolls of film, you are stuck with one iso
    speed per roll. you can't have infinitely variable iso as you can with
    digital and nobody is going to change a roll of film for one shot
    anyway.
    even more hassle.
    edge case, and iso 800 is where digital is just starting to get warmed
    up.

    modern slrs at iso 3200 and even 6400 produce fantastic results, much
    better than film could ever have done at a fraction of those speeds,
    nevermind the actual speeds. even images at higher speeds can be usable
    in many cases, especially in monochrome.

    it opens up a whole new world of opportunities.
     
    Guest, Apr 7, 2014
    #54
  15. some people like to collect old cameras and there are still some idiots
    Compare film and digital is same as compare digital and analog audio.
    There is no better or worse, they are two different things and each
    one have its points for being used more than the other.
     
    Andrea Rimicci, Apr 7, 2014
    #55
  16. some people like to collect old cameras and there are still some idiots
    Compare film and digital is same as compare digital and analog audio.
    There is no better or worse, they are two different things and each
    one have its points for being used more than the other.
     
    Andrea Rimicci, Apr 7, 2014
    #56
  17. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    digital audio is much better than analog audio. no question about that.

    the 'warm sound' of vinyl is distortion and can be added back (as can
    the clicks and pops), just as any particular film look can be emulated.
     
    Guest, Apr 7, 2014
    #57
  18. If that's true then why is the music industry still pressing vinyl
    records for - among others - top DJs to play?
     
    Cursitor Doom, Apr 7, 2014
    #58
  19. Cursitor Doom

    Guest Guest

    they aren't. djs use cds or more commonly, a computer full of mp3/aac
    files.

    vinyl sales are supposedly 'up' but not due to quality. it's nostalgia.
    it also is because digital downloads have plateaued and cd sales have
    dropped. people are streaming music on pandora, spotify, etc., rather
    than buying music as much as they used to, so vinyl looks like it's
    grown when it really hasn't. vinyl is about 1-2% of music sales, mostly
    indie stuff.
     
    Guest, Apr 7, 2014
    #59
  20. "Old farts"? - you obnoxious little shit. It took REAL skill to take
    the money shots half a century ago. A photographer needed an impecable
    sense of timing to deliver the best sporting shots; hell, even a
    facial expression can change in an instant. We didn't have everything
    done for us by the tech like you babies have today. Ignorant little
    ****.
     
    Cursitor Doom, Apr 7, 2014
    #60
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.