Shooting film at night

Mr Badger said:
Now if you'd used a high quality modern DSLR you could have taken a photo in there without any flash at all! ;) Mind you, it would have been a very different photo as it probably wouldn't have had the same comedic effect, which to be honest is why it works.

As this thread seems to have morphed (pretty much instantly) into a misinterpretation of what I said, I thought I'd put the record straight. (y) I didn't say film cameras were unsuitable for night or low light photography, or imply that they should no longer be used for such. I merely pointed out that a high-quality modern DSLR is capable of doing a much better job of hand-held, sans-flash, low light photography where non-static subjects are involved. Image stabilisation can help avoid camera shake but it can't do anything to help in the case of moving objects. Shutter speed too low = motion blur.

Yes, film cameras can be used for low light photography, if you can get fast enough film, or the photographer is relying on motion blur/shake for an artistic effect, or shooting stationary objects, etc. In other words, working within (or perhaps to) the limitations of the medium. Yes, film cameras were successfully used for low light photography in the past (mainly because it's pretty much all we had!) and could produce some very good results. However, it's a lot easier to get consistently good results in far lower light levels with a modern high-quality DLSR, take a look at some of the astro-photography these days and you'll see what I mean. With non-specialist amateur kit (the sort of thing most of us would have available), years ago you wouldn't have been able to make out some of the stars for film grain!

So it's horses for courses, but that doesn't stop us having fun exploring the limitations and look of our old film cameras, because that's what this section of the forum is about. However, as much as we love the look and fun of film photography we can't honestly deny the advantages of modern camera equipment in certain circumstances.

(y)
Click to expand...

H'mm but no one is arguing against digi being a lot easier (or better) in low light.....filmies are just showing shots etc that you can get by even if it's with a bit of inconvenience. And no one has answered how did Hollywood "fiddle" moving shots in low light...I know one trick when shots say of cowboys riding at night was:- it was shot in daylight and filtered to look like night.
 
Mr Badger said:
However, as much as we love the look and fun of film photography we can't honestly deny the advantages of modern camera equipment in certain circumstances.
Click to expand...

I agree, the advatantages are hard to deny, however personally, the thought of buying a digital camera again really doesn't fill me with excitement or enthusiasm.

I think a lot of this thread has gone a little off tangent really and the main point people (including myself) were trying to make was in response to Fraser's original post that simply said, "film is crap for this", which it isn't. He has now gone on to explain in more detail the circumstances which do make more sense, however in response to the original comment, no, film is not crap for this as a general thing.
 
gazmorton2000 said:
I agree, the advatantages are hard to deny, however personally, the thought of buying a digital camera again really doesn't fill me with excitement or enthusiasm.
Click to expand...

It's more fun getting VG results from a £5 to £40 film camera ;)
 
Fraser Euan White said:
You can do anything with film, there is no argument there but when you go out not to 'photograph' and are with others that have no interest in waiting for you to photograph then it is useless compared to digital. Pushing a film is of no use - the whole roll of 36 exposures has to be exposed/developed that way. high ISO film - adds another £8 to the costs just for a night out and when you go into somewhere bright the film is too fast.

Can't shoot at slow shutter speeds because if a picture displays any camera shake I hate it straight away and it gets discarded; I shoot film because I like film cameras and the developing - I can add 'the look of film' to a digital file in software.

If I had taken my digital camera I would have had shots I was happy with, If I had gone out to specifically take film pictures I would have probably got shots I was happy with but I wouldn't have had the company I had, I would have been on my own.
Click to expand...

I've got to disagree with a lot of this. I think you tend to put a lot of self imposed limits on film which just aren't there based on how you feel film should be.
 
Mr Badger said:
........... I didn't say film cameras were unsuitable for night or low light photography, or imply that they should no longer be used for such. I merely pointed out that a high-quality modern DSLR is capable of doing a much better job of hand-held, sans-flash, low light photography where non-static subjects are involved. Image stabilisation can help avoid camera shake but it can't do anything to help in the case of moving objects. Shutter speed too low = motion blur.

Yes, film cameras can be used for low light photography, if you can get fast enough film, or the photographer is relying on motion blur/shake for an artistic effect, or shooting stationary objects, etc. In other words, working within (or perhaps to) the limitations of the medium. Yes, film cameras were successfully used for low light photography in the past (mainly because it's pretty much all we had!) and could produce some very good results. However, it's a lot easier to get consistently good results in far lower light levels with a modern high-quality DLSR, take a look at some of the astro-photography these days and you'll see what I mean. With non-specialist amateur kit (the sort of thing most of us would have available), years ago you wouldn't have been able to make out some of the stars for film grain!

So it's horses for courses, but that doesn't stop us having fun exploring the limitations and look of our old film cameras, because that's what this section of the forum is about. However, as much as we love the look and fun of film photography we can't honestly deny the advantages of modern camera equipment in certain circumstances
Click to expand...

This exactly - every word!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top