October 4, 2009
question for Phil
While I primarily shoot digital, every once and a while I find myself thinking about how to reintegrate film. What’s your process for developing, scanning, sorting, digitizing?
Barry, feel free to jump in. Do you think about shooting film anymore?
Anyone?
comments
Leave a Reply
I shoot primarily with my D200. I have been seriously thinking about getting an old Hasselblad medium-format for a little while. My wife has a digital scanner for negatives. You just pop it in and it scans them. Pretty convenient. There are automated ones as well.
There is a warm and analog feeling that is prevalent with shooting film. Ideally, you have to move away from the standard 35mm. I think that DSLRs have come a long way in the recent years to be almost like that format.
However, there are a bunch of really interesting film cameras out there. From Hasselblads, to Leicas, and more.
Well, Deron. For the last 3 or 4 years I have shot pretty much exclusively medium format film. I get it developed commercially, I have considered developing my own black & white, but, that seems a complete new interest that I don’t have just now. So, I mostly shoot c41 film as the processing is very cheap and then I scan myself on an Epson V750 flatbed scanner. I scan negs to about 65MEG.
So I guess in many ways I am digital after the point of exposure.
I try to not get to precious about film V digital. The photo has to stand alone, so what ever lights your lemon. I love film because of the pace of shooting. If I am out all day I rarely shoot more than a film (12 shots) I spend more time looking than shooting – sure at times I wonder if I have the shot, but, mostly I believe that I do because I am confident about my ability. I believe that comes from not being able to see the shot, you have to have confidence in your ability. I find that reassuring. I get really pissed if any of the exposures are bad – really pissed. I meter using a hand held meter – it NEVER fails.
Then there is the general confidence regarding the longevity of film – digital files unsettle me. I know I scan, but, they do. I know as long as I take care of the negative it will be good for over a hundred years. I also enjoy the ability to pick it up and look at it.
Mostly though, it is about good images.
I use a mixture of Hasselblads and toy cameras. I have a Leica that seems to have had a film in it for about 4 years and I also have a bunch of other cameras that I mess with, but, mostly it is the Hasselblads and the Holga for me.
thanks, Phil. I have an epson 700 scanner which I used when I was shooting mostly film. last week I processed a few rolls of medium format and 35mm that had been sitting there. I had been excited to see them after such a long time but the process of scanning, and the fact that the images weren’t very good, ended up frustrating me. I’ve adopted a shooting style with digital that works for me, and which gives me the results I want. I also like the look of film in some cases and have been wondering if I have the patience for it. I guess I’m still thinking.
Well, I guess scanned images always need work – mostly not much, but, they need work. I guess having dipped your toe in the digital pool you know the conveniences and so film will always feel labour intensive. To me it seems quite normal. I have to admit, I find the post processing quite cathartic – I have no desire to be in a dark room, but, I do quite enjoy watching a scan come to life.
The comment I love most from Phil is that he spends more time looking than shooting. For still subjects, Atget shot about 2 pictures a day. It’s really about honing the craft of seeing, and predicting what the good shot will be. You must practice and always be framing pictures in your mind’s eye.
Unless you are a “decisive moment” kind of photographer and you are shooting a roll every hour. Remember the shot Robert Frank did of the girl in the elevator? The were 14 shots of her. I think he shot 72,000 photos to get the Americans complete in a year or so.
Matt, Atget is a hero of mine – wonderful work.
The looking is where all the fun is. The shooting is a technical exercise really, just using the skills. The time looking is what I love the most, thinking of the possibilities.
It’s odd, no matter how a trip pans out when I count the films up at the end it usually works out at about 1 film a day. Even though I may have days of not shooting I always end up with about a film a day.
To chime in on this 35mm topic, Mike, Lucy and I shoot with 70′s era 35mm SLRs. I use an auto-focus, and bless that automation, Minolta Maxxum while Lucy and Mike use Pentax k1000′s. My Minolta has a meter which I have trusted with 3 rolls so far and I really love my results. Sometimes inspiration leads to a roll shot in a few hours, sometimes I spend a whole week looking rather than shooting. I also choose my shots depending on the speed of film. I have to admit missing the ability to choose ISO while I’m out shooting. And while photographers like Phil inspire me with such graceful medium-format photos I don’t think I’m up to that yet..
I’d recommend searching for a good medium or 35mm SLR online or at flea markets and give it a go. I think the Flock would love to see your results!
(Above comment written by Lex A!)
I (Mike, for real now) agree with Phil on a primary enjoyment from film coming from the pace of shooting, the delayed gratification, the happy accident, etc. I’m really content with my Pentax K1000. It’s all manual, save for the light meter, which creates a sense of connection to the act of photography. When I walk down a street, I put the camera to my eye to set the exposure, aperture and approximate focal distance…as I walk into the shade, I drop the speed a stop or two with the camera still hanging at my wrist. It’s peaceful, and the results have been pretty good. Go for it.
Film is very forgiving, especially negative. The K1000 is a beautifully simple camera, you don’t even need the meter really, sunny 16 and all that jazz!
I also find film suits the way I see – my eyes are less sharp, I’m not sure we were supposed to see the world with such crystal clarity.
Like you say, Mike, mostly it is the pace and the not knowing – or actually the knowing. As I said, not being able to view the image has made me a more confident photographer – I am always confident I have the exposure right. The shot may be shit but it will be exposed perfectly!
Mostly, guts, take photos – digital or otherwise, if you are taking photos all is well.
You are all awesome in the older sense of the word.
My cameras have been: 64 disposable cameras on my first trip to the US, a Nikon FM2, Pentax ME Super, an automatic Minolta (dynax) that I have taken out only twice (it took away all the fun and scared off the horses with its whirring winding on noise) and lately I’ve acquired a couple of Canons that I have yet to use. They are interesting but they are rather large. This is probably the main reason I’m interested in a smallish rangefinder like the Leicas, they might fit snugly in the hand without strain, for long periods.
I like shooting wide and up close, and after a long time panting for it, I finally got a wide angle lens about a year ago in John Gunn’s wonderful camera shop in Dublin. I had a mini pash with Photo Booth when I got it in summer 2007, and I fuck around with whatever digital doodahs come my way. Super 8s have been and gone, and I’ve worked with a 16mm Aaton on occasion, too. Got a couple of light meters, one is a beauty from the forties, and it works, but I probably won’t ever use it. The other is a good hardy analogue meter that might get some use again, some day.
I think the two different approaches described in this thread are wonderful disciplines, requiring different skills. Shooting extensively and editing later is part of what made Frank and Winogrand so great. The sheer intelligence and constant involvement in their work of course, and travelling widely to be in the right places at the right time with an uncanny eye, would be other aspects of that skillset. And then there is the other approach, of carefully setting up a shot, of taking a longer view, qualities of meticulousness and faithfulness to detail, perhaps a more painterly approach, and I see this in Phil’s Crete work, in particular.
I did meet a man in a plaça on my last day in Barcelona last year, an American who shot street photographs with a huge old studio 4 x 5 camera, also used Polaroid and 35 mm on the same shots, walking around city streets and asking people to pose for him in doorways and storefronts. There’s something very eccentrically lovely about that.
thank you, Lucy.
Lucy, I was rather hoping you might chip in.
Thank you
Lucy, rangefinders are a delight to use. The size is great, they sit in the hand so beautifully and have that element of stealth! I have a Leica M2, a delight to use although there is the metering issue and it isn’t light although it is VERY quiet.
The other issue with Leica is of course the price. You might want to consider this http://is.gd/432Yz the Minox. I have had two my current one is very similar to this. The lens folds away, it has inbuilt metering and you can pick them up quite cheaply. The shutter is almost inaudible and it is half the size of a Leica and of course a fraction of the price. The Minox lenses are as sharp as a pin!
Thanks for the link, Phil. What kind of lenses are compatible with the Minox, do you know? Amazing that it’s smaller than Leica: looks much bigger in the picture. Plastic, though, which is of course lighter.
Lucy, its lenses aren’t interchangeable. It is I think a 35mm lens, so semi wide angle. I can’t speak highly enough about the camera, it is a joy to use.
Cool.
Now, if you were handy I could loan you mine to play with.
If I was handy? Do you need me to put up some shelves, Phil?
Lucy, I have been delaying putting up shelves for years! There is a cat, cameras and shelves waiting!
There is also wine and food.
Ah, the old cat and shelving routine, eh? You old smoothie.
I really need to smooth my act out as I’m a bit rusty – I usually let Timmy do the work. It was silly of me to try and do his work – he does that winding around your legs and that purr whilst he looks up at you!