Old-FashionedWhat, I was intendeing to say when I started this entry, was that I am assuming that pretty much everyone who is a photographer is using a digital camera.
I use one too now, but the work that I am putting up at first here was all done with a 35mm. film camera, a Pentax Spotmatic. It has a light meter built in, but it does not effect the photgraph being taken. You don't even have to override it. You can use the information you get from it(light meter that is), or ignore it completely, it's all up to you.
That is one things that drives me crazy about the modern cameras is the fact that you have to work so hard to get them to let you make your own choices. Phooey.
The other thing is that the prints are done in my darkroom, often using 2 developing baths, and the paper is Agfa Portriga Rapid 111, the grade of paper depending upon the negatives contrast (or lack thereof) Portriga Rapid has more silver in it than almost any other paper on the market. And, of course I used double weight paper, so washing it is tedious, I could only safely and effectively wash 10 sheets at a time, for an hour. So prolific darkroom binges took most of the next day to wash up!!
However, the results are quite lovely I think. Frankly, the computer doesn't begin to show the quality of the print, and the depth of the tonal range.
(I don't mean to sound braggy there, but I was trained by a man named Pirkle Jones, who was trained by Ansel Adams. Not only was he trained by Adams, but when Adams would go to Oh say Alaska, he would send his 8x10 negatives to Pirkle to develope. so photographically speaking, I consider myself to be Ansel Adams granddaughter. Adams also founded the photography department where I got my BFA. San Fransico Art Institute {I was in the 99th graduating class in 1977})
While the digital is very easy to use, no doubt, I would urge anyone who loves photography, and who has not yet tried a film camera, and doing their own darkroom work to give it a try. a long try. You will not regret it. Not only are the results wonderful, but it really is a lot of fun. I swear, I did cartwheeels in the darkroom the first time I printed pictures what a rush!
Learning the old-fashioned way will not nessessarily make you a better photographer, (though it will most probably give you better prints) because the system and the tools do not a good photographer make. The reason I urge most of you to do so is that from what I have seen here, there you all are already good photgraphers, in that you all have "the eye" and that cannot be taught!
So think about it, and kudos to you all for your amazing work, keep shooting!!
Optimism
Devious Comments
The cost/risk associated with film is what scares me, although I bet it's much more rewarding when you do get a good shot. Rather than taking 20 photos of the same thing and getting one you like!
Wow, Ansel Adams, big name, I've got a dismantled calender of his stuff stuck on the walls of my room, mega stuff.
--
My photo every day project> =yellowpumpkin ! | Lucky Dip! [link] [link] [link]
Oh yeah, Try to trade your ME for a Spotmatic, except for the light meter it is an entirely mechanical camera, and thusly will do your bidding with no complaint (and you don't have to argue with it,in other words , you don't have to override it should you desire to do something different than what the camera thinks you should do.) Thus will stop you from cursing at the thing. I have had both the ME and the Spotmatic and I far and away prefer the Spotmatic.
And yes it is rather more expensive than using a digital, but a camera and lenses are far cheaper to buy initially, and film and developing fluids are not prohibitably expensive. It's the paper that will get you. And there are a number of ways to cut down on your use of paper.
First, rely on your contact sheets, use a magnifyer and make goode readable contacts. It took me a while to figure that out! the keep records of every shot you do print.
I instituted a system I made up when after these guys tried to corner the silver market, the price of a 100 sheet box of paper wen from $20 a box to $60 a box overnight! first I color coded the sheets I used Pink for portraits, green for landscapes, blue for musicians (I did a lot of those!) and white for paying jobs lastly yellow for misc.
The I went across the page longways (using it horizontally) and had several columns. I) the film roll # 2)the negative #,35mm film has a number under each neg. 3) type of developer 4) type and grade of paper 5)enlarger f-stop exposure 6)how many seconds I set the enlarger for. and 7) I kept a big space in the middle to record and specifics to that print, did I dodge and/or burn it and where! and any other thing I would want to duplicate or avoid.
I did this religiously and then when I wanted to print another copy of that neg. I was really close to what I had done before. You can waste a lot of paper trying to duplicate what you've done before!!!!
So go for it! It is quite a lot of fun to do and the results are worth it.
The other litttle tip for now is that when you're developing the film, mark every minute, otherwise you'll find youself going... was that 5 minute??? and every minute counts in film developing!
Hope this inspires you to go try film.
Contact prints, good idea, that should save a lot of time and waste. I can use the photo-societies chemicals and equipment here, and paper shouldn't cost so much as they buy in bulk.
I really want to have a go in with film now, but money is a bit tight at the moment.
I've noted what you have said above and when I come to buy a Spotmatic and process photos I'll refer back to it!
But yes, I certainly am inspired!
--
My photo every day project> =yellowpumpkin ! | Lucky Dip! [link] [link] [link]
Previous PageNext Page