I do…but I’m starting to believe that I’m one of the last few. No one can argue that these new fangled techno whiz bang electronic cameras aren’t better, but I’ve got a 35mm SLR that seems to work fine. Also, it is nice to have one or two things in life that does not involve a computer download.
Sort of. I use digital for most of my work, but when I shoot my 4x5 large format camera, I still use B&W film in it. There are digital scanning backs available for 4x5, and they’re really slick for what they do (reprographic work mostly, but some landscape shooters like them). However, because of their nature, they can’t be used on moving subjects (like trains!)
Once in awhile, when I’m feeling nostalgic, I’ll throw a roll of film in one of my 35mm bodies. Occasionally you’ll even catch me using my No. 2 Brownie Box camera!
I’m still a dedicated “film user”. Digital may be more convinent, but I still think film is the way to go.
It depends on what (and how) I’m shooting. If I’m out railfanning, I’ll use my 6mp digital Nikon. If I’m out stormchasing, I’ll use the digital. If I’m shooting something casual, like the family get togethers, I use digital.
However, if I’m shooting sunrises or sunsets, or anything else that demands extremely vibrant colors, I use my F100 with VS100 Kodachrome or Provia 100.
Perhaps, in a few years, when the Full-frame 20+MP digitals become affordable, then I will be done with film. Perhaps.
IMHO, digital images lack the color saturation that I really love. Yes, I know they are not “technically” accurate, but this is art we are speaking of, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I’m still happliy using film. I’ve got a Canon AE-1 plus lenses that I purchased with a tax refund way back in 1982 and it still works just fine. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!!
I still use film I was trained on film I spent a past life as a Commercial photographer , but I have considered going digital , my kids all use digital some day .
I have a Cannon which I purchased new in 1991. Last yr I got it out,finished a roll that was in there since 2001-2002 and have sort of got back into being a camera bug. Still planning on sticking w/film.
I’m not very active anymore, being in my 70’s, but when I do any work it’s 35mm B&W for me. As with you, my equipment works fine and I understand it.
Also, from time to time I write an article for a small local quarterly magazine, with illustrations and they can only use B&W photos. Some things never go out of date.
No I don’t.
At least compared to 35mm slide film as of 10-15 years ago, my Canon S3 IS takes far better and sharper images than my old Minolta film cameras and Kodachrome ever did.
One of the things I like about digital is that it seems (at least to me) that it has more latitude than slides. I remember the old adage of slide film: “Expose for the highlights and let the shadows fall where they will”. Not so with digital and it took me a while to get used to it - and then say goodbye forever to slide film.
Maybe today’s slide films are better than they were back then - probably, but I’ll never go back to film again.
Then there’s the obvious advantages of digital that everyone knows about: Easy backups of images, “insant replay”, never have to waste a shot and shoot all you want. When I go out train-watching, I have enough camera card memory capacity to take about 900 photos…
Perhaps a downside to some is that you’ll need a PC, perhaps some photo-editing software, a memory card reader, big enough hard drive(s) to hold all of that data and a CD/DVD drive for backups.
And those backups - ever try that with slides?
[:)]
P.S. I’d post a link to my web site, but I use Firefox and these forums won’t let me copy/paste (maybe I’m missing something obvious)…
No. I have an AE-1, F4s and F5 I should sell one of these days. Any idea as to their current value?
Go to ebay and get a box of tissues. My F65 body that I paid almost $500 for 8 years ago… I might get $50 for it. If the lenses are usable on the DSLRs you can get some good cash for them.
I have an old Pentax film 35mm in the storage box that is not wearing very well since being put away some years ago.
I can still shoot film if I can find the stuff to buy around here. But to get the film, shoot the roll, turn it in, pay and pay every step of the way along with lost time waiting for the pictures…
Digital wins this time around.
Maybe one day I’ll shoot a roll again, maybe not.
Film? Whats That? I never heard of these “Film Camera’s” I guess I am way to young!!! lol!
Ahh, but you can still be a practitioner of such antiquarian methods like Daguerreotypes if you really wish it. Compared to daguerreotypes, film is easy (and safer! No mercury involved in developing your shots!).
Seriously, though, while I like and appreciate digital, I think it’s good for any serious photographer to have an understanding of how the hobby developed. (Gads, that was an awful pun.) Film was the medium of choice for a LONG time. Can you imagine how great it must have been to go to film from glass negatives? I bet that was an even better feeling than going from film to digital.
Jim, it might be good for you to shoot a roll of B&W film, develop it and print some shots. Number one, it’s a lot of fun. There’s nothing like seeing your first print come to life in the developing tray. Number two, you’ll gain a little appreciation for the convenience of the digital world we live in today.
Just after Christmas, I was down in Spencer, NC, for the North Carolina Transportation Museum. My digital is a modest Samsung 310, and my film camera is the better of two Polaroid point-and-shoots that I bought when it was essentially being remaindered out at Target for around thirty bucks ca. Spring 2003. Its zoom is particularly versatile and quick.
When I shot static shots on the digital, the Norfolk & Western Tuscan Red coaches at the museum came out rust red in one exposure and the very next one, immediately thereafter, was more accurate – but skewed too much to purple. I must have changed settings but darned if I know how. Those shots were important to me, and I fiddled quite a bit, especially boosting the vermillion via MS Picture It! Premium Ten until I could file shots without gagging. Then the pix wouldn’t transmit electronically without a big struggle until I used VSO downsizer to cut a 450kb down to about 25 to 30kb (I know, it’s our fault still having dial-up). I’m getting good at spotting where VSO cuts the picture, and how – it’s trivial but noticeable. I was using Fuji 400 print film, and needless to say the color developed true if a bit punchier than nature’s version.
Then at Folkston, the acid test, I had known already that I didn’t want to do much shooting, else I would probably have dumped the digital and moved into a cave. When a good mixed CSX NB came along, plenty of light, I tried the digital cam first and OF COURSE it [censored]'ed up as usual, lagging too long despite my having changed batteries and put it on the “eye” setting (take it no matter what). I got two-thirds of the lead CSX and as Folkston folk know, sharp angles down the track beforehand are much precluded by the RR’s extra-generous ROW thru Folkston. The film shots are still
And that is it in a nutshell. More experience is what is needed. Truth be told I had a problem with my film camera on one of those types of shots. It is a Nikon F60 (I said 65 earlier but I looked and it was a 60) with AF and and I had a shot composed with the train moving into frame and then it started hunting for focus as the train was moving. Only way for it to refocus was to zoom out, focus and then back in again and then the shot is gone.
The colour thing on the digital is probably due to conflicting light sources as they have an auto white balance feature and it picked up something in the lighting that caused it to adjust. And recovery time on the digitals is also a big thing. My Fuji Finepix S5200 I can shoot high res 5MP jpegs till the cows come home (or my 1mB card is full) but switch to the RAW format and it starts bogging down after two or three pics and the recovery time even between the initial two shots is loooonger than the digital. I have to plan my shots better
I have used slide film for all of my railroad photography until last year, and I shot my last roll of slide film during the 2007 Altoona, PA Railfest. Interestingly the last shot on the roll of slide film was a going away shot of the ex Pennsylvania railroad business car eastbound leaving Gallitzin, PA. Both of my Pentax ZX 50’s and my Pentax K 1000’s are stored serviceable just in case, but I doubt if I will ever use them again.
Not only is slide film becoming less available, processing is becoming less available and more expensive. Pretty soon neither slide film nor processing will be available.
Ric Hamilton Berwick,
You make a very good point and taught me a thing or two – as well as reminded me of something. Every head-end CSX cab we saw on the December shoot made use of two horizontal lower white lights in addition to the main headlight: they weren’t set way down low like ditch lights, but underneath the main headlights, left near to (but not at) the edge of the body and right likewise. They look very constant as the train comes up from the south (that’s the end w
RAW refers to a type of file that mid to high end digital cameras offer. RAW files record the data as it is recorded from the imaging sensor. When shooting in JPG mode, the camera’s imaging processor is making decisions about the shot - white balance, saturation, sharpness, etc.
The advantage of shooting in RAW is that the photographer has more control on the shot when post-processing it. While there are some very good processing engines on some cameras, RAW files almost always show more details, feature better color, etc.
The disadvantages are an added processing step, and larger files (RAW files usually employ some form of lossless compression, but they’re still bigger than JPG shots).
I am actually proud to say I shot my last slide last Wednesday, and my last print the day after that.
XT arrives in 7-10 days…