tmkdesign wrote:
Obviously these are more amazing than anything I could ever imagine myself doing. And I'm sure that as I develop I would look back on these and see things I can't even begin to understand now. I usually lurk and not comment on something that I really can't give a good critique on.... but I must ask, if simply because you stated you needed help picking what to print, where it the head of the figure opposite bride and goom in picture 25?
Good catch. I accidentally put that one in.... I meant to put another frame into the set. I've replaced it. Thank you.
Evan Baines wrote:
Eyeball: It is a great question. First, on the purely objective end, you're absolutely right that with a lot of effort, you could get digital shots to look pretty darn close to this on a screen. The grain might not be as truly random and organic (unless you scanned grainy negs and spent ridiculous effort on it), and the highlight roll-off and other issues might be subtly different.... but you could get close enough to fool all but a true conniseur.
The difference really shows up when you start making prints. A true darkroom fiber print made from film has a depth and presence that cannot be simulated with digital technology. Believe me, I've tried. I love digital printmaking, and I'd like to think I'm pretty good at it. Digital prints can be beautiful.... but they are different than film prints.
And on a more philosophical level: authenticity matters to me. There is part of me that recoils deep down inside about the fact that all of my digital black and white images are film "simulations" with "authentic-looking" grain and tonality. These film shots don't pretend to be anything but what they are. They're not "reproductions" of the film look: they just ARE. This won't matter to everyone: not even to most people. However, I'm spending a lot of money and effort putting together a sample album predicated on the idea that there are still people out there who agree with me on this. I don't want this to be a film vs. digital thing because I still love digital. Its amazing, and there are many aspects of modern wedding photography that hugely benefit from digital technology. I just know I'm glad my wedding was shot on B&W film, and would make the same choice today. ...Show more →
Evan - Thanks for the detailed response. Film vs. digital can be debated in many ways but I was curious what your reasons were and you explained them very well. I wish you the best success with this special product/service.
What I find amazing is just how timeless this set truly is...and I mean that in a highly respectful and admiring way. Seriously, with one or two exceptions where you can see Sam or another person using a digital camera, these pictures look like they could have been taken decades ago.
I don't know how much the B&W or film contributes to that, or if it's just your style Evan, but that to me is such an impressive quality.
In terms of favorites, I really like 44, 47, 49, and 78. As someone else said, I could see 78 hanging on my own wall as a fine art piece, that was one of the first things I thought of.
I'm glad we labeled everything that was push/pulled correctly and I didn't lose film rolls. You should have taken a hipstamatic iphone pic of the TSA guy hand checking 50 rolls of film.
I learned a ton from you and Sam this weekend, thanks!
These are all great & 15-20 of the images are absolutely superb. I love the look of film, I try & emulate the look myself in some of my digital B&W's. Very, very well done!
I have always said I would shoot only in black and white if I thought I could get away with it, but I just don't have the stones to try it.
In my head this is what wedding photography should look like, scans schmans, I like them exactly how they are with the grain and the blur and the not sharp.
There is so much character life and emotion in these I don't have the words really...
13 44 45 47 48 49 50 75 78 82 84
Really as good as it gets, Love Love all these shots.
Granted the wedding was a perfect opportunity to showcase this type of photography, the couple was amazing and classy.
I don't think these would have the same impact at Joe and Ruth's kegger wedding at Uncle Joes...apologies to Joe and Ruth.
Your skill as a photographer is really on showcase here as you made this look easy and we all know it was far from it.
Massive Kudos, charge a lot and market it well you will kill with this!
Evan..seriously...some of those images are what the term timeless really means.
#16 - wow. timeless
#18 - perfect. timeless
#50 - straight out of an ad. BEAUTIFUL. timeless
#77, 78, 78 & 80 - is one the most amazing sequences i have seen in sometime. a perfect capture of a wonderful moment. beautiful connection.
I'm lovin' this for you. And I've already told you I think they're just lovely. Such a sweetness to them that we just don't see posted often.
The ONLY one that I would take out of the series is #5... the girl on the left looks VERY awkward. Unless there was something ACTUALLY, physically wrong with her, it's less than flattering. If there WAS a handicap of some sort, then it's perfect.
