• Hey Guest!
    British Car Forum has been supporting enthusiasts for over 25 years by providing a great place to share our love for British cars. You can support our efforts by upgrading your membership for less than the dues of most car clubs. There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Upgraded members don't see this banner, nor will you see the Google ads that appear on the site.)
Tips
Tips

Film vs. Digital

Share this page

Sherlock

Sherlock

Yoda
Country flag
Offline
A couple of days ago I went out with my newly acquired Canonet QL17 G-III (old 1970's rangefinder), the test roll went quite fine, so far I'm quite happy actually...

Same scene:

With my digital camera (Nikon D70s, 50mm F/1.8 lens for those who care)

3407291377_8d66e17fb2.jpg


With the QL17 (only the one lens, permanently attached, 40mm F/1.7)

3410549261_3165ab7d99.jpg


First time using this film camera, so I'm sure I'll refine my use of it the more I use it... But I do like the feel of it...
 
Question for you: is there a problem finding camera films these days? Now that digital seems to be taking over?

Nowadays you can do lots of digital editing very easily (?), but - similar to vacuum tubes vs. solid state - there's often a "warmer feel" to the old technology.

Thanks.
Tom
 
I keep planning to pick up film for my Bronica ETRS, but so far I have just stayed with the digital due to the ease of use and the speed. I am considering picking up Photomatix to experiment with HDR from RAW format with the digital camera next. (Has anyone here done any HDR work? Sherlock?)
 
Brooklands said:
I am considering picking up Photomatix to experiment with HDR from RAW format with the digital camera next.
Click to expand...

Lots...lots...and even more than that - I just try to keep it subtle usually. I started combining the luxury of HDR processing with graduated ND filters awhile back too, they're awesome sometimes.

PS: I do single-frame HDR and 5-frame HDR. You can also do them off negs with a decent scanner

HDR crud:

255447969_quxYm-M.jpg


278747040_HtfCA-M-4.jpg


301618124_gNZkg-M-5.jpg


316375325_BqsTn-M-3.jpg


316224104_rg89q-M.jpg


231335192_fbLQ9-M.jpg


394253542_w8TC3-M-3.jpg


Note: I usually don't do aerial-HDRs but it helped to bring the roofs in and make this a little punchier.
393458285_xfk9R-L-3.jpg
 
Well...

Film cameras are still readily available, if not moreso, because of people dumping film in the rush to digital, this particular camera is one I stumbled across last weekend at an estate sale, and as I am unemployed right now I had to think twice but yet at $7.50 I couldn't say no either

I did the test roll for now but it might be the last roll I do for awhile through it, until my cash flow gets to be better again

As far as HDR? I personally don't like it much, I think it's because I've been exposed to too many over-done HDR photos that just look too fake, I'm more of a purist when it comes to photography, but then it's just a personal opinion, I know that some do like it
 
I'm setting a goal this summer to do some serious photography. both digital ans film.
We have a few digital cameras, mostly Fuji. all around 3 megapixles,
and two 35mm film SLRs
A Vivitar 3800n with an RKN 1.35-4.5, f35-70mm zoom lense
and a mamiya/sekor 1000DTL with a 1:1.8 f 55mm lense with some other stuff to play with, like a Marexar ultrawider "fisheye" lense, and several filters and such.. I plan to post my results. I gotta scan some photos I did of a B-17 right after I got the Mamiya
It would take me hours to get to work in the morning ifI stopped and took all the pictures I wanted to. especially on foggy mornings.
 
Foggy=good :smile:

I got a Mamiya 50mm lens years ago after they stopped making the 35mm stuff. Best $5 loupe I've ever had! I try hard to take care of my good glass, but this sucker gets tossed in the drawer constantly and doesn't have a mark on it (except dust from the scanner). Go figure :smile:

505106511_afCKE-M.jpg
 
aerog said:
Best $5 loupe I've ever had!
Click to expand...

I love it!! :thumbsup:

For a time back in th' salad days I used one as an enlarger lens, too.
 
DrEntropy said:
For a time back in th' salad days I used one as an enlarger lens, too.
Click to expand...

There's that too. I can't get over how the market has tanked on all the enlarger stuff. $500 lenses are practically being given away. Even our photolab guy is sliding quickly to digital printing - very impressive stuff. I still wouldn't mind shooting some 8x10 to use his horizontal enlarger though :smile:
 
Every time I think of the amounts of money I've spent on cameras/optics/darkroom gear and what it's sellin' for now, I wanna curl up into th' fetal position an' suck my thumb... :madder:
 
Sherlock said:
As far as HDR? I personally don't like it much, I think it's because I've been exposed to too many over-done HDR photos that just look too fake
Click to expand...

I'd say the vast majority of what is called "HDR" on the various freebee sites is way too overdone IMHO. Sometimes I think <span style="font-style: italic">some</span> "photographers" impress themselves by doing something so off the deep end that it looks "different" and in their world "different" is good, regardless if "different" is what they originally wanted (if they even knew what they wanted in the first place).

Looking at the really neat landscape photographers these days it's usually difficult to see who is using what techniques, and that's how it should be. There's been a huge resurgence of use of filters (which is something else people argue is fakery, depends on your point of view though). I can't get over how creative people have gotten using several graduated ND filters to achieve the effects they want -- which honestly is nothing more than doing HDR without going overboard.

After seeing (and doing) the amount of darkroom manipulation to achieve what artists like Ansel Adams did, I only wish digital hit us a lot earlier than it did.
 
DrEntropy said:
Every time I think of the amounts of money I've spent on cameras/optics/darkroom gear and what it's sellin' for now, I wanna curl up into th' fetal position an' suck my thumb... :madder:
Click to expand...

Hey, if it makes ya feel better... :smile:
 
Well, it's either that or mind-numbing drugs... :shocked:
 
By the by... I've seen a few photographers on Smugmug that have come up with some really nice techniques that work for them.

This one shows evidence of HDR processing, I'm not entirely sure what he does. Some is really good, some isn't: click it

As far as I know all of this work is done just straight or with filters to increase range: click it

...he does a pretty respectable job of lighting on his automotive work too: click it
 
A friend of mine here in Calgary is an awesome landscape photographer, using filters in the place of HDR.

His thoughts on HDR is that it's a technique to allow average photographers to plug in their photos to software to create their so-called <span style="font-style: italic">"master pieces"</span>, he doesn't think much of the technique if you get my drift

Whereas Kevin has learned how to really read light effectively with some incredible results, and his use of filters merely compliments his ability.

His Flickr account here to see for yourself... https://www.flickr.com/photos/floatingimitations/
 
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion :smile: I've heard precisely the same argument against everything from filters to photoshop. I read one case where an "expert" demanded that you really should only use a 50mm lens (on a 35mm camera), anything else is just a cheap crutch.

Really though, the end result is what matters. Some of my best sellers have some mild HDR technique, including a few that were used in advertising for a pro photo workshop in Acadia National Park. Just between us though, I didn't tell them I used multiple-image HDR :wink:

PS: As far as plugging images into software, all you need is photoshop or gimp and rest of it is up to the photographer's eye :smile:
 
I love my GIMP.

As for th' argument about "truth"... well... If ya don't witness it with yer own eyes, it's subject to ~something~.

We live in uncertain times. :wink:
 
DrEntropy said:
I love my GIMP.
Click to expand...

I meant the program... um...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:]
As for th' argument about "truth"... well... If ya don't witness it with yer own eyes, it's subject to ~something~.[/QUOTE]

Years ago someone lectured me about how "post processing" of any kind (including density or color correction) was totally and completely wrong. I had to break it to him that every single print from a negative had some kind of "post processing". Ignorance is bliss :laugh:
 
As fer th' Gimp, so did I.

The "post-processing" argument is self-evident. As soon as the neg is projected there are "editorial" processes at work.

...we need to sit and BS. :wink:
 
Back
Top