11-09-11 – Purely Film

Some archive mining bees –

http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/scan0007.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/scan0001.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/l-08.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Duchess.jpg

The kid pics are all with a P&S 35 mm ShurShot. The Golf Digest one wasn’t set up.
The doggie pic is from high school (mid 80’s) with my AE-1. I’m pretty sure that the print is that old too.

ya know, I always SWORE I would NEVER EVER EVER change from film to digital (I also swore I’d never do those mp3 thingys). Seeing this contest and what’s posted and the quality difference is AMAZING. And soon enough there’s going to be something I’m going to refuse to give up and learn and then I shall be old and useless.

To a point, perhaps. But what wasn’t done was much post processing. In my photos, for example, I could have (within the scanner even, let alone the computer) reduced the noise, enhanced the colors, sharpened the image, and adjusted the curves for a more pleasing effect.

I think the majority of pictures represent our photography without doing those things. Heck, due to a kick-arse clean-room cloth wiping process, I didn’t even have to do any dust deletes (which would have been totally kosher to do.)

ya know, I always SWORE I would NEVER EVER EVER change from film to digital (I also swore I’d never do those mp3 thingys). Seeing this contest and what’s posted and the quality difference is AMAZING. And soon enough there’s going to be something I’m going to refuse to give up and learn and then I shall be old and useless.

To a point, perhaps. But what wasn’t done was much post processing. In my photos, for example, I could have (within the scanner even, let alone the computer) reduced the noise, enhanced the colors, sharpened the image, and adjusted the curves for a more pleasing effect.

I think the majority of pictures represent our photography without doing those things. Heck, due to a kick-arse clean-room cloth wiping process, I didn’t even have to do any dust deletes (which would have been totally kosher to do.)

OMG I hope I didn’t offend. I voted and there was a heapton of awesome in there. The compositions and photos themselves are just as good. I was just thinking aloud about the basic ability to point and shoot and upload and clarity.

No offense taken. I think there’s loads of awesomeness, too.

But I also think we get spoiled by digital in the ease in which we can bring out the elements that help make a photo special. Much more difficult with film, unless you happen to have your own darkroom and a load of chemicals and a lot of chemistry know-how.

Not to mention the instant gratification of knowing, right then and there, if you captured a photo that’s going to represent what you wanted it to be in the first place.

Not to mention the instant gratification of knowing, right then and there, if you captured a photo that’s going to represent what you wanted it to be in the first place.

If I had a nickel for every time I looked at the back of one of my film cameras to check the preview and histogram and felt like a n00b, I’d be able to buy a couple sodas.

Congrats to aspidites for the individual win and to Ranger Joe/cameraflage for the combined win. The Weekly Reports post has been updated with the latest stats.

Someone said the thread sucked?

We’ll be here when you get back!