I'm quite shocked........

@Gandhi
Oh what a perfect way to introduce him to photography, & getting him involved in film work early :}
 
Last edited:
IamAshlyRose said:
Mm, I think those that discard the idea of something they've never tried are just ignorant. I never knew much about film photography before I tried it but as soon as we were introduced to it I fell in love with working with a manual SLR, as did many of the students on my course. I think a lot of people see film cameras & think "F#!@?/. that!" 'cause of how technical many of them look. I've found that after mentioning working in an actual darkroom, people become intrigued, asking questions. Usually only those who've never worked with film will be the first to dispute it.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I think that's a bit harsh. I grew up with film - there was nothing else available - and I still use it occasionally, but that's mainly because I enjoy my F2 and FM more than any DSLR I've tried. Nostalgia, and the memories the cameras bring back, is probably part of it but there's nothing wrong with that.

Pros normally use whatever works best from a business point of view. Amateurs don't have deadlines, and don't have to meet their clients' expectations, so they have a lot more leeway to follow their own inclinations which may, or may not, include experimenting. I would encourage people to try film, but I wouldn't dismiss them as 'ignorant' for ignoring it. There are lots of reasons why it may not appeal to people.
 
In reality, I used to have to use digital for work. With the deadlines we had to work to, it would be impossible to work with film and still make a profit or remain competitive. I would have had to do the shoot, stay up half the night developing and scanning then trying to send massive files over the internet to the office to go back to the agents the following morning. Unfortunately it's a product of the society we live in. Everybody expects everything straight away as if it's an entitlement. This is just as true in photography as it is seen in the current world debt crisis.

We recently had a client who supplied her own images that she'd had taken a few years ago. They were on 5x4 RDPII (Old Provia!). They took me 4 hours to scan and about the same to dust-spot ready to go into the brochure.

Mind you, they did look absolutley lovely :)
 
@MartynK
It wasn't intended to be harsh & definitely not directed at everyone! It's just my own experience ~ but then I've only ever debated the uses of film with those who're my own age & many of us got scoffed at for loving to work in the darkroom during college which was a shame.
 
IamAshlyRose said:
@MartynK
It wasn't intended to be harsh & definitely not directed at everyone! It's just my own experience ~ but then I've only ever debated the uses of film with those who're my own age & many of us got scoffed at for loving to work in the darkroom during college which was a shame.
Click to expand...

OK, pax, I wasn't trying to pick a fight with you! :) Perhaps I misunderstood. People make our own choices, and we can disagree with them, but I don't think we should scoff.

My daughter - who is a bit older than you - started with my film cameras, but prefers digital because it's convenient and gives her the results she wants, and she's not particularly interested in photography as such. My son can't even imagine why anyone would use film. Neither of them would knock you for it though!
 
IamAshlyRose said:
Mm, I think those that discard the idea of something they've never tried are just ignorant.
Click to expand...

Surely this happens a lot in day-to-day life? People who shun foods that they haven't actually tried before? Those fanboys who shun Nikon/Canon + Mac OS/Windows OS + Android/iOS (delete as appropriate) without ever having much experience of the other. If someone learnt on digital and it adequately satisfies the experience they want from their photography hobby, I can see why they wouldn't feel the need to try film :shrug:

Of course some people don't like technical stuff - the whole development of aperture priority, shutter priority, program modes and subsequently full auto was because that's how manufacturers could sell more cameras.

Swings and roundabouts.
 
JCoquillon said:
As a roundabout fanboy, I'd say it has to be roundabouts!

Anyone saying otherwise is wrong.

p.s. I've never tried a swing.
Click to expand...

Thank you, just had to change my keyboard as I have spat coffee all over it :D

Mart
 
Hahahaha!
Nah definitely, every photographer uses different mediums. Whilst digital is amazing & I use it all the time, I find I'm actually more interested in film photography. Best of both I guess!
 
This situation doesn't surprise me tbh.

When i did photography for my gcse's we only spent around a term learning the aspects of film photography, non of this was included in coursework assignments or the main 10 hour exam. So in the eyes of the examination body this term would of probably been rendered a waste.

Shame really :-|
 
I think the only thing to add to a all digital training, is to pop a pos-it note under the camera rear screen, and limit the number of shots to 40 a day. In that way, the student will learn how to use instinct, concentrate on getting things right and value real composition
 
@Richard King
Couldn't agree more. Part of the magic of film is knowing each frame is more precious & not always knowing the outcome you'll achieve.
 
At what point does the image, its construction, and the thought process behind it, become more important than the process used to arrive at it? Some people may love film, others digital, but the point of the exercise is surely the end product?
 
With the kind donations of members on here and by utilising freecycle to the max, I run a film photography club with children after school at the primary school where I teach.

The children love it (7-9yrs this half term, 9-11yrs next half term)

We have made camera obscuras, light pictures with photo paper/developer/fixer, matchbox pinhole cameras and have worked with and developed 35mm film from some very antique slr cameras.

They all say they prefer the instant nature of digital, but they LOVE using the film.

I'm just on the lookout for a 35mm scanner now as the enlarger that I obtained on freecycle isn't very good (and I'm not sure if I'm using it right)
 
mustanir said:
So, does gear like this make film photography less magic? :p
Click to expand...

That's a pretty specialised piece of kit with one or two distinct purposes. Not sure what you are getting at?

cornishboy said:
At what point does the image, its construction, and the thought process behind it, become more important than the process used to arrive at it? Some people may love film, others digital, but the point of the exercise is surely the end product?
Click to expand...

Yes, the end product is always the point, but there are those that may argue that because of the relative qualities of shooting film compared to digital, the end product has more intrinsic worth.

A famous portrait photographer remarked on the radio t'other morning that "all these people running around with digital cameras are not photographers, they are, at best, artists that work with a digital medium"

I may or may not agree with the points above, but they are thoughts that surface in my mind sometimes.

-halli- said:
snipped for brevity!
Click to expand...

Brilliant, I sincerely believe things like this will remain with the kids for years to come and if it inspires just one or two of them then it is all worth while!
 
@-halli- That's amazing!
I wish my little sister had the opportunity to work with film in the darkroom, she just loves creating images of any kind. Often she'll pick up my camera & call herself "a 'tographer" snapping away taking photographs ~ she's eleven in October.
 
Gandhi said:
A famous portrait photographer remarked on the radio t'other morning that "all these people running around with digital cameras are not photographers, they are, at best, artists that work with a digital medium
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that statement. Photography on digital or on film is still the same.

However, the approach and thought process that a purely digitally trained photographer takes to capturing and processing a shot can be very different to how a film photographer might approach it.

They will often, from the outset, be anticipating how they intend to enhance the image. Making it more accurate to how their eye saw it, using Photoshop after taking it. Be happier to tweak the exposure and get it right after taking the image. For me film is about getting the image as close to right at the moment of capture as your equipment will allow.

We could get into an argument as to whether a digital image even really exists. Or whether a photograph only exists once it has been processed and printed as the photographer intended. But that is a whole other can of worms.
 
but there are those that may argue that because of the relative qualities of shooting film compared to digital, the end product has more intrinsic worth.


I would say that those who argue that are talking out of their egos
 
cornishboy said:
I would say that those who argue that are talking out of their egos
Click to expand...

:LOL: I'm sure you're aware that Photography as a whole is an area where let us say "vigorous" ego's abound...probably find some on either side of the argument tbh...

or, in the words of a certain Z.Beeblebrox "If there's anything around here more important than my ego, I want it caught and shot now! "
 
cornishboy said:
but there are those that may argue that because of the relative qualities of shooting film compared to digital, the end product has more intrinsic worth.

I would say that those who argue that are talking out of their egos
Click to expand...

So an individual hand made piece of furniture created by a master carpenter has no more worth than a mass produced fibreboard coffee table from Argos?
 
Undoubtedly more effort goes into working manually with film & then dev'ing everything yourself, it makes me personally feel more like I've created something. I don't think it has anything to do with ego? Working with film doesn't entitle you to call yourself a "better" photographer but it does give you a sense of real accomplishment 'cause you've worked with that photograph from exposure to print without the assistance of technology as such. I work with both & I couldn't decide which medium I prefer but {talking from my own experience here} I consider my darkroom work from college more valuable than what I can produce with a digital camera. Working with digital, I always feel the need to post process to give my work little bit of 'me' otherwise I feel like anyone could have shot it.
 
IamAshlyRose said:
..... Working with digital, I always feel the need to post process to give my work little bit of 'me' otherwise I feel like anyone could have shot it.
Click to expand...


Ashly I agree that in working with film, developing and printing yourself, you do impart that little bit of yourself to the finished product. There is absolutely no getting away from that and a sheer pleasure too now that I cast my mind back to those days.

However I also think that someone looking at your digital results will also say that it was you who shot those. It may be more obvious over time when one has built up a style and reputation but your work is still yours. The things you see, the way you shoot. It's like a signature - I think so anyway :)
 
Last edited:
@Houston1863 Definitely, technique {among other things} build up a signature & make a photographers' work recognisable, after all we all have a different vision. Maybe it's as I'm younger & less experienced? I just find that without post production I haven't left my imprint on a photograph. Perhaps part of my style is creating something slightly less realistic? hahaha I'm unsure.
 
IamAshlyRose said:
@Houston1863 Definitely, technique {among other things} build up a signature & make a photographers' work recognisable, after all we all have a different vision. Maybe it's as I'm younger & less experienced? I just find that without post production I haven't left my imprint on a photograph. Perhaps part of my style is creating something slightly less realistic? hahaha I'm unsure.
Click to expand...

I think one's perspective that changes with time. Since you've been working a lot with film it is natural that you see your imprint through film. And you also have a very hands on approach judging by that video. That's definitely a good thing and bodes well in whatever medium you work in.

Perhaps I'm where I am because it has been a very long time since I worked with film. I think I also enjoy the instant results approach of Digital. Mind you having to post process doesn't always make it feel that instant!! I wouldn't know what to do if I wasn't able to look at the viewfinder to see what I've taken. The suspense might kill me!!! I have enjoyed my time with film and recently wondered if I would ever go back. I think I would miss looking at the viewfinder :LOL:


:wave:
 
@Houston1863
Yeah, whenever I shoot a roll of film I'm eager to see the photographs right away. I often make exposure mistakes too not being able to get instant 'test shots' & I often bracket to make up for it. I have to say, working with film definitely has taught me to be more considerate about the composition & all that of my photographs in both film & digital! I agree that every path each different photographer takes defines the style they go on to develop.
 
@JCoquillon hahaha, I quite like that :}
 
My feeling is that photographers with digital cameras may put as much effort and thought into their images as their film counterparts. having listened to a fascinating article about the American magazine Sports Ilustrated last week, there could be days of planning going into the production of an image, which graces a magazine. just because the image is taken with a digital camera doesn't reduce the skill which has gone into the planning and preparation
 
mustanir said:
I didn't do GCSE Photography and I managed just fine.
Click to expand...

Would have liked to as my school had a massive darkroom which we could have used, shame none of the teachers had a clue...
 
My school had a darkroom marked on the map - unfortunately when I went to investigate I found it had been turned into an office!

They didn't offer photography anyway when I went there so I'm not surprised considering the attitude of my school which seemed to be: "If theres something there that works absolutely fine (like our 6th form area) then turn it into something else 'better'" (Like a 'silent study area' was better for our 6th form area??)
 
Last edited:
We had a darkroom at school (back in the 60's), but we had to evict the amorous young couples before we could get to use it. ;)
 
That sounds disturbingly like my school s162216, but at least ours was split across 2 sites so the 6th form could escape the 12 year olds most of the time

tbh I'd have just be happy being able to do a none core curriculum subject when I was doing my GCSEs, the most unusual subject choice available to us was IT, taught by an incompetent

The likelyhood of any normal school having darkroom facilities for a class of 30 kids has got to be pretty low, and devoting that much space to something that will get little use, and has extremely limited use in the commercial world just sadly doesn't make sense
 
Where I live we have 3 tier schools (Lower, Middle and Upper) so there were no 12 year olds to escape from...

The 14 year old year 9's were always annoying though and before the management 'revamped/ruined/'stole' our nice comfortable 6th form area with TV, comfy chairs etc it was nice to be able to get away from them.

I was forced to have to do something non core as well as it was a Performing Arts college as well so you had to choose something 'creative', I ended up choosing electronics (although if photography was available I would have chosen that) and ended up really enjoying it (and getting the highest mark for the project coursework out of everyone!:LOL:)
 
My high school had a darkroom altho it was limited ~ you could print negatives in there but all dev'ing had to be done using changing bags & tanks in the usual classroom. I managed to work in there a lot whilst writing my own Art briefs. They didn't introduce GCSE Photography 'til 2007 despite having had the darkroom working for years before & I'd already been studying mine a year by that time which was a shame. I realised that my knowledge of working with film was limited when I went on to study a National Diploma in Photography at Kingston College of Art & Design which was a traditional course. I guess that school gave about as much understanding of working with film as a school who didn't offer the course.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top