The Portraits on Film thread

Messages
825
Name
Alistair
Edit My Images
No
A new-ish portrait of my friend Robin.
Shot on Lomo Earl Grey 100 with the Olympus OM20 and 50mm Zuiko. Filmdev dev and scan. I have a couple of colour shots I might upload too.

I thought it appropriate to shoot Robin on film because it's an analogue audio fanatic. He's a producer and creator of audio, often using loops of 1/4 inch analogue tape to create sounds (like the old Radiophonic workshop).
If you're interested, he blog has more details. Link Here.


Robin - film portrait by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr
 

moomike

TPer Emeritus
Messages
6,136
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
Some outstanding portraits in this thread, really inspirational - am going to aim to get some 5x4 portraits done soon but for now, here's one of my daughter when she was a little younger. Captured on my Rolleiflex with Delta 3200 and home developed. I have to admit that I thought I was going to hate this film as I usually avoid high ISOs on my DSLR/mirrorless cameras, but, I love this film! It was the first time I understood what people meant when they said that film has a 3D feel to the grain and I tend to reach for higher grain film/push now instead of trying to minimise it.

 

Andysnap

<span class="poty">POTY (Film) 2015</span>
Messages
15,332
Name
Andy Grant
Edit My Images
Yes
Messages
25
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello, I'm new here. Before I head right in, is this thread one where we give our own subjective, honest comment on the pictures posted? If so I'm interested.

Nikon F3, 35mm f.2 neopan deved in the bathroom and scanned.



112644272_93bdc5a3c3_o.jpg
 
Last edited:

RaglanSurf

Forum Idiot'13/14 <span class=poty>FPOTY'17</span>
Messages
10,338
Name
Nick
Edit My Images
Yes
As suggested by @Sir SR , a thread where people can add portraits taken on film of various sizes, dimensions, types etc. It could be useful for people wondering about this sort of thing or getting into it to see what other people are doing.

Should there be rules? I am not sure but maybe I will suggest the folllowing as a way of helping people learn.

  • One image per post
  • Include film stock, camera and where it was developed/scanned

I only suggest including film stock and dev/scan methods to help people see why things are the way they are, not because gear is important.
Hello, I'm new here. Before I head right in, is this thread one where we give our own subjective, honest comment on the pictures posted? If so I'm interested.

Nikon F3, 35mm f.2 neopan deved in the bathroom and scanned.



View attachment 124113
Welcome to the film bit Richard, according to the OP there's no hard or fast rules about commenting and the one image per post rule seems to have long been abandoned but that's pretty much how it is in F&C.
So basically comment away and hopefully some others will comment on yours.
 
Messages
25
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
Andysnap,

I've decided to comment on this picture of yours because it raised a question that I thought might be worth considering on this thread, 'Portraits On Film':

Can a portrait be a portrait if the subject doesn't know they are being photographed? And if it can, when does it stop just being a photo of someone and become a portrait? I have my own opinions on this, which relate mostly to the intention of the photographer and also touch on the purpose of portraits themselves and what we are doing when we make one.

What do other people think?

Richard

A few from the Black Country Living Museum on the September film meet.

Nikon F801, Nikon 35-70mm lens on Vista 400 film, converted a couple just because they felt right that way.

Taking-Tea
by Andy, on Flickr
 
Messages
25
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
If it's XP2 you can use a lab like Photo Express or Filmdev that do only or mainly C41 (XP2 is a C41 black and white film, rather than an old-fashioned "proper" B&W). Photo Express will charge you £5 per film process and scan, less a 50p discount per film if you quote your TP username. They also charge £1.50 return postage. Filmdev charge £5 per film process and medium scan, will sleeve in 6s and provide TIFFs if requested, no return postage charge. Annoyingly, 35mm film cassettes are just too large to fit as "large letter", so need to go small packet rate (£3.30?). I sometimes do without the plastic outer, wrap the film in alfoil, and wing it with large letter rate. Works most of the time (not for more than 2 cassettes, IME) but when it goes wrong they wait several days before delivering and charge extra postage that you'll have to pay.
Chris, Does the above still apply? Richard
 

Andysnap

<span class="poty">POTY (Film) 2015</span>
Messages
15,332
Name
Andy Grant
Edit My Images
Yes
Andysnap,

I've decided to comment on this picture of yours because it raised a question that I thought might be worth considering on this thread, 'Portraits On Film':

Can a portrait be a portrait if the subject doesn't know they are being photographed? And if it can, when does it stop just being a photo of someone and become a portrait? I have my own opinions on this, which relate mostly to the intention of the photographer and also touch on the purpose of portraits themselves and what we are doing when we make one.

What do other people think?

Richard
You make valid points Richard although in the case of my post all the people involved were re-enactors and were well aware that the photographs were being taken and although not necessarily posed shots there was a definite collusion between photographer and 'model'. I'm not entirely sure if street portraits, especially if done unnoticed, can be called portraits but I'm definitely not the arbiter of these things so I'll leave everyone to decide for themselves.

Regards

Andy
 
Messages
4,922
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
Yes
Really like this Trevor, except that you've cropped out his hand and elbow. Frame or a choice in post? Richard
Richard. This is the full frame. As you know precise composition can be tricky with rangefinder. I also couldn’t get any further back.
 
Messages
25
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
Would it? Why?

Because, she and her gaze are the things that are the narrative component of the image, so naturally I want to tell the story (isn't this storytelling part of ourselves what gets activated by a good picture) and the question I'm asking is what is she looking at? It's not that simple in this image because it's hard to tell whether she just has 'far away eyes' - is she actually looking at something or only musing? Either way, there's a very well established convention (grammar) that when people look out of the frame we give them space to look into. Rules are for breaking, it seems to me, but not by accident. So, I'm interested in the choices you've made, and why?



Well I am sure that if it were your shot, that you would frame it differently.
Of course, I would, but you posted it here, so I'm guessing you wanted people to tell you what they think. No?
I think it's a pity that her elbow and fingers are cut off (another bit of well-established grammar), a different framing (crop or angle) might alleviate that and given that the face is spectacular, I'm sorry to be diverted from it by those things.
 
Messages
25
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
Richard. This is the full frame. As you know precise composition can be tricky with rangefinder. I also couldn’t get any further back.
Trevor, you're right, it can be a pain. You've got the space above his head - I've found that I've really had to concentrate on the bottom of the frame because I've made this sort of 'mistake' often. What I started to do is to check the corners and that way I can spot it before it happens sometimes. :)
 
OP
OP
gazmorton2000
Messages
4,173
Name
Gareth (Not Gary!)
Edit My Images
No
Of course, I would, but you posted it here, so I'm guessing you wanted people to tell you what they think. No?
I think it's a pity that her elbow and fingers are cut off (another bit of well-established grammar), a different framing (crop or angle) might alleviate that and given that the face is spectacular, I'm sorry to be diverted from it by those things.
No, I wasn't looking for critique. The thread is in that section, yes, but when it was started it was more of a place where people could share their portraits on film, that was all. If I was looking for critique, I would have given it it's own thread in the people & portraits section. I haven't posted an image for critique in years on here and only frequent the film section now, and only post in there rarely.
 
Messages
25
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
Welcome to the film bit Richard, according to the OP there's no hard or fast rules about commenting and the one image per post rule seems to have long been abandoned but that's pretty much how it is in F&C.
So basically comment away and hopefully some others will comment on yours.
Thanks, as you can see, I've been busy :)

A couple of questions. Is there a way to reply to a post so that the replies are threaded? Is it possible to view the thread against a darker background - some kind of neutral grey perhaps?
 
Messages
25
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
No, I wasn't looking for critique. The thread is in that section, yes, but when it was started it was more of a place where people could share their portraits on film, that was all. If I was looking for critique, I would have given it it's own thread in the people & portraits section. I haven't posted an image for critique in years on here and only frequent the film section now, and only post in there rarely.
Well, you started the thing, so you know what you want. I took the Sharing & Critique part literally. I guess I'm in the wrong place.

I'll delete the posts that haven't been replied to. All the best, Richard
 
OP
OP
gazmorton2000
Messages
4,173
Name
Gareth (Not Gary!)
Edit My Images
No
Well, you started the thing, so you know what you want. I took the Sharing & Critique part literally. I guess I'm in the wrong place.

I'll delete the posts that haven't been replied to. All the best, Richard
Hey, it's not my forum. It's everyones. I don't make the rules. I won't be posting any more photos though or getting involved in this thread any longer, so feel free to do as you please. :)
 
Messages
1,780
Name
Mads
Edit My Images
Yes
You make valid points Richard although in the case of my post all the people involved were re-enactors and were well aware that the photographs were being taken and although not necessarily posed shots there was a definite collusion between photographer and 'model'. I'm not entirely sure if street portraits, especially if done unnoticed, can be called portraits but I'm definitely not the arbiter of these things so I'll leave everyone to decide for themselves.

Regards

Andy

Can we chuck that up in the general talk photography bit to see what everyone thinks, not just those of us who frequent the fixer laden air in here?
 
Messages
5,827
Name
Shaheed
Edit My Images
No
I like the third particularly. Please don't mind me saying so, but I preferred your digital work.
Don’t mind at all. In fact if you’d seen my digital stuff at the equivalent stage of me using film, you might be surprised

I came at photography “backwards” in that I learned on digital and then got a film camera a couple of years ago. It’s still a learning process for me with film. Are they great.....not really. Will they help me along the way to getting better on film whilst having more fun with the process (shooting, manual focus/exposure, looking through the ground glass finder, developing/scanning at home when able). Definitely!
 
Messages
3,286
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
No
Also just found the thread...


Difficult Portrait
by Ian, on Flickr

'Difficult' as in the TLR was tricky to focus. The Ektar is a bit too heavy for portraits too (As Andy commented on Flickr) and overall sharpness was a bit of a letdown for me.
more work required in this area methinks!
 
Messages
816
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
Yes
the annual visit of the Salvation Army Band from Hadleigh, Essex to Brentwood, Essex for Christmas Carols. I put THIS into the 'Portrait Cup' competition of Brentwood & District Photographic Club last night Friday 11th Jan, and Judge said " There is no detail in his coat" BUT we all complained that ALL the entries were too DARK on our replacement Digital Projector after the Burglary at Friends Meting House when our Projector was stolen -- they didn't take any of the Quakers' Religious Books !
Pentax MZ-5 + SMC-F Pentax 100-300mm f4.5-5.6. Outdated 2008 Koni ca VX 400 Pro, scanned with Epson 2480 flatbed + FastStone Image Viewer.
MZ-5 07.jpg
 
Top