If digital technology did not exist.....

Moderated by: Steve Tinetti, Fred Miranda

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Wedding Resource List

FM Forums | Wedding Photographer | Join Image Upload
1

3 end

bert reed
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #1 · If digital technology did not exist.....

Started with medium format film. Mamiya 645 and Kodak Portra..loved it.
Film separated the men from the boys.

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:02 AM

saustin
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #2 · If digital technology did not exist.....

Film was so much less time consuming. I really miss the time. I miss the look of film although that is less and less an issue. Digital has made me lazy. I don't think I pay as much attention as I did with film (to the surroundings). I like the ablility to tweak things in digital though. I went digital with weddings last-of all the things I shoot. I still have all my film cameras....you just never know...
sharon

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:15 AM

TRReichman
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #3 · If digital technology did not exist.....

Don't know? Like my job, but I hate loading film.

- trr

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:16 AM

lisy78
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #4 · If digital technology did not exist.....

NO. I would most likely not.

I used to shoot film and enjoyed it... but I didn't LOVE IT.

The problem for me is that I don't see what's captured by the camera as the final product, so the idea of shooting an event and then sending the film off to someone else to develop and print doesn't do it for me.

I'm not into over the top retouching or anything... but I enjoy FINISHING my photos myself. In fact I enjoy that part as much or more than the actual shooting.

At the same time I would not have the time, nor the space to actually have a darkroom.

So the reality is that the whole thing would lose A LOT of it's appeal.

I would have been much more likely to have gone into creating mixed media portraits. Wether that would have been a sustainable business I don't know

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:36 AM

T Bangerter
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #5 · If digital technology did not exist.....

I shot film in college. It defiantly gave me a different feeling to my work. I think I got more joy out of film because of all the work that goes it to it. But I haven't really done color film. You would defiantly see different results out of me. I still break out the old TLR sometimes, but haven't at a wedding.

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:49 AM

Paul Reams
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #6 · If digital technology did not exist.....

Nope. Probably wouldn't have picked up an SLR or paid too much attention to photography. I came in thru the tech end...

Nov 03, 2009 at 05:03 AM

canonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #7 · If digital technology did not exist.....

ARDENT wrote:
I would still WANT to be a photographer but I doubt my skills would be anywhere near where they are now...

ARDENT, why do you say this? You can still be creative with film!

Nov 03, 2009 at 12:47 PM

canonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #8 · If digital technology did not exist.....

MTBtrials wrote:

I love the instant gratification, but if I were to get into film, I would probably have to process my own prints... that sounds like it's where the fun/magic happens with film.

This is why I liked Black & white film better it can be handled by the individual from shooting, custom processing-printing, and presenting to a clinet/friend/etc.

Nothing like running the old Tri-X ( the current grade is kinda based on T-Max film) and checking out the beautiful grain.

Nov 03, 2009 at 12:51 PM

canonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #9 · If digital technology did not exist.....

One thing I feel is interesting, with the talk of the 5d being 'full frame', 24x36mm, the same effect , depth of field, existed with 35mm film for decades.

Even moreso with 6x6 & 6x7, plus if you were a tough guy/lady shooting with a 4x5, camera. more expensive per shot but forced one to think about their setup before pressing the button.

Nov 03, 2009 at 01:11 PM

BKphotography
Online
Image Upload: On

p.2 #10 · If digital technology did not exist.....

Gabe is shooting some cool stuff with film these days.

I was addicted to black white film, I miss the magic that happens in the darkroom too.

I would love to 2nd a wedding shooting film but I wouldn't use it flying solo.

Nov 03, 2009 at 01:34 PM

BillupsPhotography
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #11 · If digital technology did not exist.....

In some ways, I miss film. However professionally my first wedding was the only one I have done with film. My 4x5 still gets pulled out for some zone system work now and again.

Nov 03, 2009 at 01:53 PM

DB
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.2 #12 · If digital technology did not exist.....

I wanted to be a wedding photog back in the film days. I never liked the look of digital as much as film, but have since then embraced digital. I think I'd like to offer fine art film photography with digital in the future.

Of course, I couldn't experiment nearly as much, and I'd have to limit myself to just one or two shots of the same setup...

Nov 03, 2009 at 02:45 PM

DB
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.2 #13 · If digital technology did not exist.....

BKphotography wrote:
I would love to 2nd a wedding shooting film but I wouldn't use it flying solo.

So true!

Nov 03, 2009 at 02:46 PM

vbjimmie
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #14 · If digital technology did not exist.....

flash wrote:
[Film was so much easier than digital.
Gordon

So, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say....film still exists. Maybe you aussies just don't import it? I've never seen how film is easier though. Hell, digital basically tells you wether or not you got your shot right. Film...not so much.

Nov 03, 2009 at 02:56 PM

canonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #15 · If digital technology did not exist.....

vbjimmie wrote:
flash wrote:
[Film was so much easier than digital.
Gordon

So, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say....film still exists. Maybe you aussies just don't import it? I've never seen how film is easier though. Hell, digital basically tells you wether or not you got your shot right. Film...not so much.

I think digital, to a point, makes one a little lazy as it gives one the thinking "i can get it right in photoshop if there's a mistake". For film, you had to get it right in the camera which forced folks to shoot lesser frames and have more keepers.

I started shooting digital like film for many things and the keeper rate went waaay up! Sitting at a computer correcting images is not so much fun!

Nov 03, 2009 at 02:59 PM

sboerup
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.2 #16 · If digital technology did not exist.....

I knew when I was a teenager that being a photographer would be cool. I might not have pursued it as hard as I did, digital made the transition easier.

Nov 03, 2009 at 03:03 PM

canonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #17 · If digital technology did not exist.....

sboerup wrote:
I knew when I was a teenager that being a photographer would be cool. I might not have pursued it as hard as I did, digital made the transition easier.

Did you do much work in film as a teenager?

I resisted digital as I was a PT newspaper sports shooter on film in 2003, worked full time and went to school at night. At that time, digital make work a little easier as I cut out time from processing color film and made getting work done faster.

Some things I learned from 10-15 yrs earlier with transparencies/B&W just went to digital. Downside is, unless one invests in the many programs in post processing, digital looks the same, more or less.

No velvia/provia/kodachrome/Tri-X/ APX-100 look as there once was long ago and could tell by the film's distinct characteristics.

Nov 03, 2009 at 03:10 PM

lisy78
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #18 · If digital technology did not exist.....

canonet wrote:
vbjimmie wrote:
flash wrote:
[Film was so much easier than digital.
Gordon

So, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say....film still exists. Maybe you aussies just don't import it? I've never seen how film is easier though. Hell, digital basically tells you wether or not you got your shot right. Film...not so much.

I think digital, to a point, makes one a little lazy as it gives one the thinking "i can get it right in photoshop if there's a mistake". For film, you had to get it right in the camera which forced folks to shoot lesser frames and have more keepers.

I started shooting digital like film for many things and the keeper rate went waaay up! Sitting at a computer correcting images is not so much fun!

What you say is true in terms of composition and blinkies and whatnot... but not in terms of exposure. You had to work very hard to make a shot truly unusable with film. With Digital (even with Raw and it's response to pushing/pulling) there is significantly less latitude for exposure errors

Nov 03, 2009 at 03:10 PM

vbjimmie
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #19 · If digital technology did not exist.....

I think of it like this.

I don't care what people say...I chimp my ass off.
I take a shot, I chimp. It wasn't right...I adjust, take next shot.

You can't do that with film. That's why I say digtal is easier than film.

Nov 03, 2009 at 03:26 PM

Beni
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.2 #20 · If digital technology did not exist.....

If of course you get the chance to take it again...

Nov 03, 2009 at 03:48 PM

vbjimmie
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #21 · If digital technology did not exist.....

Which is why I said 'next shot'
I'm never so off that I can't fix it in post...but I don't want to have to.

Nov 03, 2009 at 03:51 PM

jofoto photo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #22 · If digital technology did not exist.....

How's many Bob's do you know that can meter and load a roll of film

?
Far less competitive market if it was film only.
Actually taught about setting up a site for film only weddings, a niche market now don't you think.
I certainly won't be pulling the trigger, film B/W got a lot of character, hard to reproduce with digital.

canonet wrote:
jofoto photo wrote:
I miss my Mamiya, a resounding yes and double up on the prices. No digital would be at this moment be a godsend.
I'd dance the streets if alien bugs ate cmos and ccd and bob's ass

What makes you say this? I still pull out my mamiyas to shoot and sometimes drag a C330 and a Rb67 to shoot basketball ( it can be done!) . I;m not hip on Digital B&W.

I think a nice hand-printed 11x14 B&W portrait with a RB67 and a 127mm or 180 on fiber base paper blows the doors of a 5d and a L-series lens ( i'm gonna get shot for that statement!)

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:02 PM

canonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #23 · If digital technology did not exist.....

vbjimmie wrote:
I think of it like this.

I don't care what people say...I chimp my ass off.
I take a shot, I chimp. It wasn't right...I adjust, take next shot.

You can't do that with film. That's why I say digtal is easier than film.

I say you can with film. Of course you cannot see it but the years of shooting similar sitiuations in weddings, etc. should tell one what lighting situations work or not work. if you see an indoor shot, immediately you may think :

Flash 1/2 power (if guide number on flash is sufficient to do so) @ ASA 400 1/60 at F5.6 if subject is x feet away. Adjust( stop down) if moving closer or further( open up). I still ask about the guide number on a flash in feet!

The downside of SLRs is you have the flapping mirror, unlike a twin-lens or big 4x5.

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:03 PM

canonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #24 · If digital technology did not exist.....

jofoto says:

How's many Bob's do you know that can meter and load a roll of film ?
Far less competitive market if it was film only.
Actually taught about setting up a site for film only weddings, a niche market now don't you think.
I certainly won't be pulling the trigger, film B/W got a lot of character, hard to reproduce with digital.

I know a couple but they're nervous at situations where tech ability counts! I cannot remember when there were so many wedding photographers on the market to shoot. Is that also the case in the UK with the rise of D-SLRs?

I've tried with digital to get a decent B&W print and no luck. i can run some Ilford XP2 Super in my hasselblad or RB, even a Nikon F, and the result is unmatched by any fancy post-process digiphoto ( in my opinion).

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:14 PM

jofoto photo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #25 · If digital technology did not exist.....

The rise in wedding shooters is solely attributed to DSLR's, my demographics is much the same.
10-20 shooters per available wedding, pricepoint becomes a major factor. Blown dresses are now fine art weddings and actually perceived as better photography because it was supposedly done deliberately, My A.S , the mind boggles when i see it and my stomach churns, WTH am I doing wrong, all you do is educate the client and hope they have the good sense to value the difference. Whether it be digital or film.

Unfortunately today's client couldn't care less about this.
( I've tried with digital to get a decent B&W print and no luck. i can run some Ilford XP2 Super in my hasselblad or RB, even a Nikon F, and the result is unmatched by any fancy post-process digiphoto ( in my opinion)

canonet wrote:
jofoto says:

How's many Bob's do you know that can meter and load a roll of film ?
Far less competitive market if it was film only.
Actually taught about setting up a site for film only weddings, a niche market now don't you think.
I certainly won't be pulling the trigger, film B/W got a lot of character, hard to reproduce with digital.

I know a couple but they're nervous at situations where tech ability counts! I cannot remember when there were so many wedding photographers on the market to shoot. Is that also the case in the UK with the rise of D-SLRs?

I've tried with digital to get a decent B&W print and no luck. i can run some Ilford XP2 Super in my hasselblad or RB, even a Nikon F, and the result is unmatched by any fancy post-process digiphoto ( in my opinion).

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:34 PM


FM Forums \| Wedding Photographer \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 end