Anyone still shoot film?

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Patrick L, Jan 25, 2010.

  1. Patrick L

    Paul Furman Guest

    Thanks!
     
    Paul Furman, Jan 30, 2010
    1. Advertisements

  2. Patrick L

    tony cooper Guest

    Oh, I thought "Skippy" was the name of a dog and was wondering about
    making sausage of him.
     
    tony cooper, Jan 30, 2010
    1. Advertisements

  3. For someone who's been around photography as long as you claim to have,
    you're awfully ignorant.

    No, "they" can't turn used fixer into usable fixer; once it's used up
    it's no good. The silver, however, *is* regularly reclaimed from it.
    This can even be done at home on a small scale, though it's something of
    a PITA. Or you can take the fixer to a larger lab where they can add it
    to their storage tank for reclamation.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 30, 2010
  4. I don't know exactly what "they" do with it. I do know that the silver
    is relatively easy to extract, and that it *is* extracted, since it has
    some economic value.

    I'm pretty sure they don't just pump it underground, or dispose of it in
    a body of water, not if they're a reputable outfit. I assume that the
    spent fixer is chemically treated somehow to render it non-toxic, or at
    least less toxic. They may even extract some usable chemicals from it.

    A lot of chemicals get recycled and reused. (Probably not as much as
    should be.) But I'm not a chemist, so I can't give you the gory details.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 30, 2010
  5. Check your attribution: that wasn't me who said (or implied) that.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 30, 2010
  6. You may be slow, but you eventually catch on.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 30, 2010
  7. It's probably a little more compelling when there's a chance your own
    face, or your friend's faces, will come up among the images.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Jan 30, 2010
  8. Patrick L

    Peter Chant Guest

    Yes, I can read perfectly. Why get so defensive? I was merely adding a
    suggestion that if Astia was not saturated enough for _someone_ why not use
    Provia. What you lacked in your statement was what someone should do if
    they wanted more contrast.

    Bit of a jump to go from Astia to Velvia if you want more saturation? You
    seem to be advocating using one of the other with no middle option.
    Your horse is rather high.
     
    Peter Chant, Jan 30, 2010
  9. No such problems here, but I don't think I have any Agfa negatives
    over a dozen years old and no Agfachrome at all.
    I have everything I need to shoot it, including a 70mm bulk loader,
    cartridges, Technidol, and the 70mm kit for the Pentax 645n. But I
    will have to cut it to dip-and-dunk lengths instead of the standard
    15-foot lengths.

    It's just that I haven't figured out the right project. But spring
    is coming, such as it is in New England.
    I used NPZ/800Z only a few times, and never in full sunlight. I
    was okay with the colors, but found it had very little latitude
    for underexposure. My comparison against the 500T was based on an
    overcast shoot at Lime Rock Park.

    I do keep a 12-shot "decoy roll" of Fuji 1600, though. When flying
    with film, it makes it quicker to obtain a hand inspection.
    Nice shot.
     
    Michael Benveniste, Jan 30, 2010
  10. Patrick L

    K W Hart Guest

    As the "official" Presidental portrait, the above cited photo doesn't
    impress me. To me, it looks like a WalMart portrait, not the least bit
    "Presidential". The lighting and background are very plain- it's like an ID
    photo- there's no drama to it. Someone else here pointed out that the
    photographer worked for the Reagan admin so probably 'grew up' on film.
    Perhaps his background is news/journalism photography. If so, it's a shame
    the White House didn't select a photographer with a background in
    portraiture.

    Mr Graham points out that any photo seen online is going to be a 'digital'
    photo. (I hope my paraphrasing is acceptable.) This is why I won't post my
    work for critical viewing online. If anyone wants to compare my film shots
    optically printed to their digital photos, I will only do it with the actual
    photographic prints. Figure out a way for me to cram a 20x24" print into a
    port on my DSL modem and have it spit out of your modem just as it left
    here, and I'll gladly post it! I do post some of my work on Facebook, but
    with the notation that it was shot on film and loses quality in the scan
    process.
     
    K W Hart, Jan 30, 2010
  11. Patrick L

    K W Hart Guest

    Getting the silver out of fixer is not too difficult- it can be as simple as
    dumping used fixer into a five gallon bucket filled with steel wool. Over
    time the silver 'plates out' (possibly not the proper expression- pardon my
    lack of chemistry knowledge) on the steel wool, which can be sent to a
    reclaiming company. You might get enough payment to cover the cost of the
    steel wool!

    A year ago, I had to make some drain plumbing changes in my color darkroom.
    The old drain pipe had a blackish coating that looked like tarnished silver
    coating it. I considered asking the muncipal authority to pay me for
    silver-plating the sewer lines, but I thought it might be best to just keep
    my mouth shut!
     
    K W Hart, Jan 30, 2010
  12. Patrick L

    Paul Furman Guest

    Paul Furman, Jan 30, 2010
  13. Patrick L

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Looking at them side by side, Reagan's is better. The Obama portrait has
    that sterile, lifeless, homogeneous digital look (which doesn't even have
    to be a characteristic of all digital images). Reagan's has more life, more
    emotion, more character.

    The scan at the Reagan Library site is much worse, which just shows how
    important a good scan is.
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Jan 31, 2010
  14. Patrick L

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Don't be ridiculous. Who said that?
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Jan 31, 2010
  15. Patrick L

    Paul Furman Guest

    I'll agree on the comment elsewhere in the thread that a creative
    portrait photog could do better than a journalist. A super-formal
    portrait like this anyone could do.
     
    Paul Furman, Jan 31, 2010
  16. Patrick L

    Paul Furman Guest

    To be fair, you have posted stitched downsized composites before without
    indicating that. BTW, my computer melted down and I'm on a loaner now so
    all my filters are gone. I didn't realize noons is actually a photog
    with experience, I had plonked him as a frequent sniper in the regular
    silly arguments here.
     
    Paul Furman, Jan 31, 2010
  17. Patrick L

    Rol_Lei Nut Guest


    I guess not matter how bad the photo if it is shot on digital it is better?

    LOL! It seems like Scott's only interest is to put down film, coming up
    with the silliest arguments in order to do so.

    Do you sell digital cameras?
     
    Rol_Lei Nut, Jan 31, 2010
  18. Patrick L

    Bruce Guest


    I agree it isn't the most flattering portrait. There is no connection
    between the subject and photographer. It doesn't appear to be the
    work of a portrait photographer.

    The lighting is harsh, plus a longer focal length would probably have
    improved the perspective. I would also have chosen a wider aperture
    to further defocus the background.

    The Reagan shot is very much better. It has nothing to do with the
    choice of medium, film versus digital. There is a warmth that is
    completely lacking in the Obama shot, and that isn't solely due to the
    difference in the subjects' personalities.

    The lighting is still strong, but much less harsh. The longer focal
    length makes for a more flattering perspective. The background is
    defocused to just the right degree. The photographer knew how to make
    a good portrait.
     
    Bruce, Jan 31, 2010
  19. Patrick L

    Noons Guest

    Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 31/01/2010 12:23 PM:
    I don't snort. That's an invention from your country.
    Canon's images. Not Souza's images. See if you capice:
    Canon's AF and its lenses focus point are ratshit.
    Every pro knows it.
    Which ones? The ones where you cut subjects and paste backgrounds?
     
    Noons, Jan 31, 2010
  20. Patrick L

    Noons Guest

    Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 31/01/2010 12:05 PM:
    Wow! I'll bet that was a surprise! LOL!
     
    Noons, Jan 31, 2010
    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.