fierelly Posted November 25, 2019 Share Posted November 25, 2019 I recently acquired a Contax RTS III in great condition and have been having a lot of fun. Film photography is making a comeback (damned hipsters..) but I don't mind the current low-key and beautiful film photography world one bit. Fan of Helen Levitt and Walker Evans. Any 35mm photographers out there, I love learning about cameras. Please let me know what you've got and how it's been treating you! Thank you, Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunstun365 Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 (edited) Yes I started with 35mm on my very first camera in the 80's & they even accept film photograph scans on here which is great. (the only stock site that has so far) I have many film slides where you used a proejctor to view or small 35mm slide viewer. You need good quality scans though (not from those realy cheap scanners) But you can send them somewhere at reasonable cost to get scanned, negatives about £1 a strip slides are more. I do my own slide scans on an old Nikon scanner from 2003 which alamy accepted with no trouble as long as you crop the edges of the photo on a paint program. A good new scanner I believe is an Epson Perfection V550 which has adapters for 35mm or roll film. You need to remove dust & any sratches on the scanned photo though. but most good scanners including mine have digital ICE scratch dust removing systems built in. I'd love to use film again & when I told a friend that, they gave me a Minolta dymax SLR and some sony / Minolta lenses. I recently bought a sony NEX digital cam just so I could use these lenses (with an adapter) I don't think I'd use slide film again though because its so expensive. neg film is much cheaper to both buy and have developed. I have many old negatives too but sadly don't have the 35mm neg adapter for my scanner are hard to get now and scanning prints will be nowhere near as good.. What might be a good idea is to carry a film camera if you go somewhere special so you can shoot film as well as digital & have cameras that take the same lenses so not so much to carry - and if the battery runs out on the digital. Edited December 12, 2019 by dunstun365 more info Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Harrison Posted December 13, 2019 Share Posted December 13, 2019 (edited) On 25/11/2019 at 20:09, fierelly said: recently acquired a Contax RTS III in great condition and have been having a lot of fun. I think that you've encompassed it in that sentence, shooting film is about having fun and I'm glad that you are, and I'm also glad that film photography is gaining ground, particularly amongst the young, and amongst some of us older hipsters of course. It would be a lie to say that I shoot much film these days and, since this is a stock photography forum, unwise to think it is at all sensible to use it for serious stock photography, but to have fun - yes, of course. One thing that you can't take away from film, you have an analogue original that you can hold in your hands, and if looked after reasonably carefully will survive for at least a hundred years, good luck with your terabytes of data in 20 years or so. Also film cameras are beautiful objects in their own right, your Contax is very high quality as are its lenses but you may find that now you just can't resist getting some more cameras here and there (Gear Acquisition Syndrome). Light seals usually need replacing and of course some repairs can be expensive but you may just be lucky, There is quite a lot on film / slide scanning on here because many have images taken in the pre-digital era and it is possible for these to sell, particularly if they have some period or historical merit. Have fun. Edited December 13, 2019 by Harry Harrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted December 13, 2019 Share Posted December 13, 2019 35 years of shooting film was enough. I have no nostalgia for traveling with 500 to 600 rolls of color film. I have maybe two dozen images at Alamy that were shot on film. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Harrison Posted December 13, 2019 Share Posted December 13, 2019 Here's an update from Speed Graphic in the UK, as they say, good news and bad: Kodak: the good news and the bad Good Ektachrome E100 is now available in 120 and 4x5" formats. We may see some 120 this month, but the sheet film will not arrive until early next year. Bad All other Kodak films will increase in price on January 1st. Worldwide demand has grossly outstripped Kodak's manufacturing capacity in Rochester, so to fund investment in new plant, prices are being increased. This will range from 10-15% on black and white and Gold, to 30% on Portra and Ektar and 43% on Color Plus 200. Kodak Alaris will also take the unprecedented step of cancelling all worldwide backorders on December 31st which means that if we don't have it now it will cost us and therefore you more in January. Because of this we will remove all unavailable films from our website now when stock is exhausted and will have to cancel any unfulfilled back orders. Here's a question: with Kodak Alaris trying to get rid of their film, paper and chemicals division, and Eastman Kodak making all these things for them, why doesn't Eastman Kodak buy back the business? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert M Estall Posted December 13, 2019 Share Posted December 13, 2019 The suggestion that transparencies will last 100 years is quite a push. Kodachrome was the most stable but has not been available for some years. If you do find a few rolls of any, leave them as a curious display. There is no way of having them processed now. I have an archive of 35mm and 6x7 transparencies which go back 50 years which have been looked after well. There are many different emulsions, some are lasting better than others. I too like the idea of something tangible and shuffling them about on a Lightbox is still a great way of editing. But I wouldn't want to go back there. But I still have a wonderful collection of Canon F1 and Pentax 67 bodies and many lenses. I get them out occasionally and make sure they are OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Harrison Posted December 13, 2019 Share Posted December 13, 2019 8 minutes ago, Robert M Estall said: The suggestion that transparencies will last 100 years is quite a push Yes, it was a generalisation, I was really thinking about B&W negatives, or prints like the ones of Naples that Geogphotos has found. I'm dubious of claims of longevity for 'giclee' prints and as I said, I very much doubt that digital archives will last very long in practical terms, to be passed on to one's descendants perhaps - will they pay the Cloud storage subscription, will they even know the password? It's not something that concerns me particularly, but it is a factor I think. My wife's cousin found some B&W negatives taken by her late father when she was clearing out his garage, he had never mentioned them. She did a very decent job of scanning them and we all looked at them together on her tablet with my wife's mother, his sister. It was fascinating, a part of London in the late fifties and early sixties that has now been knocked down, so many memories came to light of the people portrayed, it was entrancing. I was keen to see the negatives, "Oh I threw them away after I'd scanned them". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Woods Posted December 14, 2019 Share Posted December 14, 2019 If I had the space I would quite like to have a B&W darkroom again. I love my D750 but there is an unreplaceable magic in putting the sheet of paper into the tray. On the other hand I can't think of anything that would persuade me to shoot slides again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted December 14, 2019 Share Posted December 14, 2019 Would anyone like to buy a pile of lead-lined, x-ray proof, film-protection travel bags at a really good price? My love affair with film is definitely over... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted December 14, 2019 Share Posted December 14, 2019 Ask Chuck, the Original about getting film out of a war zone to an agency. By the way, who's the other Chuck, the not so original one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertSnapper Posted December 14, 2019 Share Posted December 14, 2019 I bought two rolls of Ilford just two days ago ! I use a Leica CL. Love it. Also use a Hasselblad 500cm too (6x6). What I like about film, is taking pictures and not knowing what I have captured until processed......about 6 months later ! Using my Hasselblad slows me down, be more selective. I tend to take chances/be more creative when using film, I like the unexpected results. It's fun yes, but also profitable. The good ones get scanned and end up on book covers ! I'm a big fan of Walker Evans too. Alamy are fine with film scans. Enjoy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunstun365 Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 (edited) what I liked about film though is that you had to be realy selective in what subjects you shot so you didn't run out and had to take real care with focusing exposure etc. so you didn't waste film. With digital I still take the same amount of care (Had to to pass QC) but aslo because I deon't want too many photos to sort out & upload. Problem is you have to upload a lot to get any sales. The problem with digital as harry hinted on is how would anybody view digital photos in the far future. Hard drives don't last forever & memory cards break & ppl. don't print anymore. The cloud owned by google etc. may go out of business Edited March 14, 2020 by dunstun365 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 On 15/12/2019 at 03:43, Ed Rooney said: Ask Chuck, the Original about getting film out of a war zone to an agency. By the way, who's the other Chuck, the not so original one? Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back, our Chuck adopted that moniker to distinguish himself from that UK bloke Prince Charles, IMMSMW Keep well, Edo DD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 On 13/03/2020 at 23:47, dustydingo said: Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back, our Chuck adopted that moniker to distinguish himself from that UK bloke Prince Charles, IMMSMW Keep well, Edo DD Happened to have been named after him and yes I have met the Queen. Neither Her Majesty or my Mother liked Chuck, but an editor at a magazine did (it was shorter than Charles in the credit) PS chatting about film is a waste of time, but it would appear that we all have a bit of it now so...... Greetings Edo Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 I know my memory is starting to suffer from the demands I've placed on it over the last 7 decades, but this is what it tells me: About 10 years ago, on the old Alamy forum, another contributor called Chuck appeared. ISTR that he was an American living in Switzerland but I can't recall his name. Chuck N started appending "The Original One" to his posts, and eventually the other Chuck changed his nick to Charlie. When the new forum appeared, Alamy presumably though it was a fitting status for Chuck's profile. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 5 hours ago, Inchiquin said: I know my memory is starting to suffer from the demands I've placed on it over the last 7 decades, but this is what it tells me: About 10 years ago, on the old Alamy forum, another contributor called Chuck appeared. ISTR that he was an American living in Switzerland but I can't recall his name. Chuck N started appending "The Original One" to his posts, and eventually the other Chuck changed his nick to Charlie. When the new forum appeared, Alamy presumably though it was a fitting status for Chuck's profile. Alan Alan, Your memory is better than mine and yes that was exactly how "the original one" started. The funny thing, appropriate to this thread, I said in the 80's that if I was going to photograph the end of the world, it would be on KODACHROME. I sill have a roll of PKR sitting on my desk. Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 2 hours ago, Chuck Nacke said: The funny thing, appropriate to this thread, I said in the 80's that if I was going to photograph the end of the world, it would be on KODACHROME. I sill have a roll of PKR sitting on my desk. You can't photograph the end of the world, because the photograph wouldn't exist. You could photograph the millisecond before the end of the world but then what's the point since no-one will ever see it? If a tree falls in an empty forest, does it make a sound? If a photograph is never seen, is it visible? Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MizBrown Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 I've got several old medium format scans in my portfolio, but none of them have even been zoomed. I rather miss medium format at times, and a friend who took film to Cuba has some amazing black and white shots scanned and posted to social media. Cuba and B&W worked very well together. He developed in Diafine, which was what I used when I did have film cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 3 hours ago, Inchiquin said: You can't photograph the end of the world, because the photograph wouldn't exist. You could photograph the millisecond before the end of the world but then what's the point since no-one will ever see it? If a tree falls in an empty forest, does it make a sound? If a photograph is never seen, is it visible? Alan Alan, You may have a good memory, but you seem to lack a sense of humor? This is a silly discussion about film photography and yes in the 80's while sitting around with a group of other photojournalists in a bar I did say " I would photograph the end of the world with Kodachrome." As we all know this is not the end of the world, I hope. Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted March 17, 2020 Share Posted March 17, 2020 13 hours ago, Chuck Nacke said: You may have a good memory, but you seem to lack a sense of humor? Over the years I've learned not to judge people's sense of humour from their online comments. You can't convey sarcastic humour adequately in a written comment. I still try though Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted March 17, 2020 Share Posted March 17, 2020 Thanks Alan, My comment about the end of the world was made in the 80's when we were all concerned about a different threat. P.S. Kodachrome appeared to handle exposure to radiation better than E-6, you really don't want to know how I found out about that.... All the best, Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now