A Place for Film Photography!

[Smotzer]

Hey all, I have really been meaning to begin contributing and getting this Through the Lens subforum going more but just kept forgetting.

Anyway I wanted to start a thread for people to have a place to talk, and questions, post photos, etc., about analog film photography (slide/negative).
Does anyone else shoot film?? I started out on 35mm and shot film, and developed myself in a darkroom for a bit of time. I haven't developed much recently and I haven't been shooting as much film as id like but film for me is a true joy!!

So if anyone shoots film or has an interest in shooting film feel free to use this as a place to post photos, ask questions, and talk, about film camera's and film.

(Not sure how much traction in this this will get in this digital day and age but worth a try.)

 

[Smotzer]

One of my favorite images I ever created was below. This dark humid stairwell in an abandoned school in lambertville NJ. This was taken in 2009-2010.


Little easter egg that I didnt see until I had developed the image was that where the sunlight is hitting the stairway landing at the top of the stairway, the camera actually captured water being evaporated by the sunlight coming through the window!! Quite incredible unnnexpected joy that came of this 35mm negative!!

Camera/photo info.
Canon AE-1
Film- Illford HP5+
ISO- 400
(I dont remember the settings off my head as it was over 10yrs ago now)
I need to rescan this in for better quality it was done on a cheap scanner 10yrs ago.

 

[viper69]

I have Fujia Velvia and Ilford B&W in the fridge.

I prefer film way over digital!!!!

 

[Smotzer]

I have Fujia Velvia and Ilford B&W in the fridge.

I prefer film way over digital!!!!

So do I buddy!! you just can’t produce any ye same feeling wort digitals most the time. been saving the old velvia and newer 50 for something I really want to shoot And I have loved Ilford for a long time. I’ve got this ilford panf plus 50 I’ve just been wanting to get out and do some fine B&W portraits with. That’s a awesome roll to shoot with! but the HP5+ i love for grain with feeling with street photo.

for my 10yr anniversary in a few months I think I’m going to buy all the epiupment I think to start digitizing all my film with my DSLR.

@viper69 post some film if you’ve got it!!

 

[ConstantSorrow]

My Dad is an aviation photographer who refuses to shoot on digital. Bless you guys, it seems to be a dying skill.

 

[Smotzer]

Bless you guys, it seems to be a dying skill.

It’s been slowly dying for a long time lol

 

[Hardus nameous]

So I walked into a camera store today thinking I was going to replace a lens for my Pentax. Instead I ended up walking out with a Nikkormat FTN (with 50mm 1.4); so now I can use all my Nikon F mount SLR lenses from my digital camera for film. I threw a roll of some Kodak 400 ISO colour film in it to try it out, but even after reading the manual I'm not positive about the light meter. My solution was to take two exposures with different settings; so in theory half the roll should either be over or under exposed. Unfortunately getting film developed around here takes one to three weeks, so if I drop the film off tomorrow I should have it back when I get home from work in a few weeks.
I can't wait to get the hang of the light meter in this little tank of a camera. It was fun shooting film again. I might have to try some black and white film before I go too.

 

[dragonblade71]

Smotzer, great work. I like that image - very moody and atmospheric. The light on the steps really adds to it in a dramatic way.

And by the way, great choice of camera - the Canon AE-1. Classic camera. That was my first SLR camera and I still have it. And yea I generally choose Ilford films myself when I shoot on B&W film.

Hardus, well done on scoring the Nikkormat. Ive never shot with Nikon gear myself. Though with regards to bracketing film, I would shoot three exposures myself - particularly with slide film (at half stops.) One at the estimated exposure, one over and one under. Though with negative film, two exposures would probably be fine. If it was me shooting with neg film, I would probably deliberately overexpose the first exposure by about half a stop and then overexpose the second frame by another stop.

Gosh, the last time I promoted film on these forums, I got shot down by digital purists.

 

[Hardus nameous]

Smotzer, great work. I like that image - very moody and atmospheric. The light on the steps really adds to it in a dramatic way.

And by the way, great choice of camera - the Canon AE-1. Classic camera. That was my first SLR camera and I still have it. And yea I generally choose Ilford films myself when I shoot on B&W film.

Hardus, well done on scoring the Nikkormat. Ive never shot with Nikon gear myself. Though with regards to bracketing film, I would shoot three exposures myself - particularly with slide film (at half stops.) One at the estimated exposure, one over and one under. Though with negative film, two exposures would probably be fine. If it was me shooting with neg film, I would probably deliberately overexpose the first exposure by about half a stop and then overexpose the second frame by another stop.

Thanks, it turns out the meter is pretty accurate in the Nikkormat and I love that little thing. Now I'm set up to develop B&W at home and I even found a good deal on an enlarger; so now I don't have to wait for weeks to see my B&W. It's going to take alot of practice, but hopefully someday I can produce decent prints.
I don't have time when I'm at work, but while I'm home I want to shoot some rolls and take notes on the shots so I can remember how I bracketed them.
It's alot to learn, but film is just fun.

 

[The Snark]

A friend had one of the finest cameras made in the 1940s. Made mostly of oak with a bellows that extended out over 1 foot. He perfected techniques of eliminating parallax or tweaking it by angling the end of the bellows and the camera. various ways. One shot that stood out and is still stuck in my mind is looking down a street with cars parked to one side and buildings on the other, with the parallax skewed where distance and vanishing point were completely weirded out. Looking at that picture made some people feel seasick.
He had a large album of that and similar shots and I toyed with the thought of digitizing and enhancing them. All were of course somewhat grainy black and white. I lost the chance though.
Don't ask me how he did what. I'm a photographic dunce.

Trivia

Spoiler

My friend was in the signal corp in the Pacific theater during world war 2. A photography fanatic he was issued the aforementioned camera. He was then assigned a very ... difficult? duty. They mounted his camera in the side door of a B25 Mitchell bomber and strapped him in behind it. Then they flew at tree top level and when they came across a shell hole or bomb crater they would circle back, at the right moment turn the plane on its side and he would take pictures of the holes. The shots had to be straight down, carefully focused and from a pretty exacting distance. They were doing an assessment of the various weaponry. To make his job a little more exciting a number of the flights were done behind enemy lines and on more than one occasion they had to get the heck out of there with enemy aircraft on their tail. (The Mitchell without a heavy load at near sea level is an aerial acrobat.)

My friends claim to fame his was one of the photographs showing MacAthur striding out of the sea in his publicity stunt of 'I have Returned'. There were several photographers at the time. That picture is one of extreme incongruity and displayed the man's overblown ego. Why is he wading through the waves after coming out of a fully amphibious landng craft that can drive on land? Just stepping out of a 'Duck' onto the beach wasn't dramatic enough for him. This was probably his shot as he knew better than to be on the other side facing the sunlight reflecting on the waves. This was the fifth take. Mac wanted to be in front and isolated from everyone else to stand out. After each take he returned to the ship to change into a newly pressed uniform. Notice how clean and bright his uniform is compared to everyone else.

When my friend left the service he was allowed to keep the camera.

 

[Hardus nameous]

It took me forever and they're not the best, but I finally got some spider shots on film. Both are through the glass of the enclosures with a Vivitar 283 on top of the enclosures and a bit behind the spiders using a frustratingly short PC cable. Ilford Ortho 80 Plus (135) in a Nikkormat FTN, Nikkor 50 F2 @ F16, Vivitar 2X Macro Focusing Teleconverter, 1/125. Scanned on an Epson V600.

Lasiodora parahybana


Davus Pentaloris

Both scans (like most of mine) show dust artifacts which don't show up on the chemical prints.

 

[dragonblade71]

Hadus, nice work! I like both images. The second one reminds me of that scene near the end of The Incredible Shrinking Man film where the attacking spider puts on that threat pose.

 

[Dry Desert]

Hadus, nice work! I like both images. The second one reminds me of that scene near the end of The Incredible Shrinking Man film where the attacking spider puts on that threat pose.

I still use film with my excellent Minolta system.
I've kept all the early solid metal and multi coated glass lens, and they are fantastic, typical Minolta colour that the earlier lens were famous for.
I have two large draws full of prints and slides, and now the weather here in the UK is better, I shall be out and about again.
Have you guys tried Kodak Exacta 100, or Kodak Porta160, or 400. Excellent films.

Digital purist that poo pop film tend to forget where the origins of digital came from.

Also if you want to see probably the best landscape photos ever, look up Ansal Adams.

 

[Introvertebrate]

........and you guys thought red light bulbs were for heat lamps right?

 

[gambite]

I have Fujia Velvia and Ilford B&W in the fridge.

I prefer film way over digital!!!!

I too have a small hoarde of Velvia 100 120 in the fridge. Some of the most beautiful film I ever used. Such a shame the EPA blocked its import to the USA!

i also am a huge fan of film photography and prefer to shoot film, especially b&w, over digital, but I have taken a looong hiatus from it due to the time and money and effort involved. Every roll of film shot ends up being like 1-2hrs of manual work to develop and cut and scan and edit, etc... Got burnt out after a few years of that

 

[IntermittentSygnal]

I miss it. I shot Hasselblads at work and used my 645 and Mamiya C330 on my independent work. Had a Calumet 4x5 for fun. Sold them all a few years back. Regrets.

 

[Hardus nameous]

I brought two film cameras (a 135 and 120), a digital and tons of film to work for the annual tugboat round up but didn't get a single picture because I got to clean up a sewage issue instead.
Just be glad I didn't take pictures of that........
Mabye when I get home I can try some spider shots again.

 

[Dry Desert]

I brought two film cameras (a 135 and 120), a digital and tons of film to work for the annual tugboat round up but didn't get a single picture because I got to clean up a sewage issue instead.
Just be glad I didn't take pictures of that........
Mabye when I get home I can try some spider shots again.

I recently purchased 2 Sony A700 to enable me to use my Minolta lens.

Sold them both after 2 months use.

Bang off couple hundred shots, sort through, save the best, upload them - then what - in the majority of case, nothing.

Not for me, sorry

I think there is more hassle involved with sorting through digital, than shooting a roll of film and having it developed by your professional lab with a choice of developed only, with prints, or will all plus a c.d. Best of both worlds, minimum hassle.

 

[Smotzer]

I recently purchased 2 Sony A700 to enable me to use my Minolta lens.

Sold them both after 2 months use.

Bang off couple hundred shots, sort through, save the best, upload them - then what - in the majority of case, nothing.

Not for me, sorry

I think there is more hassle involved with sorting through digital, than shooting a roll of film and having it developed by your professional lab with a choice of developed only, with prints, or will all plus a c.d. Best of both worlds, minimum hassle.

I agree with this completely, its one of the biggest downfalls with digital, that you dont plan to get the shot you want, and take the shot you want or need. Digital can be convient but it also comes with a lot of other problems.

 

[Hardus nameous]

I definitely need lots of improvement, but it's something. I had a few shots left on a roll of HP5+ and I've been meaning to get some shots of the pets. In the future I'll have to try harder not to blow the highlights so badly.

Ilford HP5+ (135) in Ilfosol3 1+14