Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Should all beginning photographers start out with a film camera to learn how to shoot correctly?
Page <<first <prev 9 of 16 next> last>>
Jun 8, 2013 21:28:02   #
Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN
 
No it has a technical advantage. That is resolution and depth. Average digital cannot match medium or large format film yet. Medium format digital is expensive.

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 21:54:49   #
wilikioti Loc: Deep South, USA
 
[quote=RLKurth]Should all beginning photographers start out with a film camera to learn how to shoot?

No! I can't think of one good reason for a person to start out with film. Been there and done that. Film photography is dead as far as I'm concerned.
I suppose if there was a valid reason to start with film it would be just because one wanted to.

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 21:55:14   #
wlgoode Loc: Globe, AZ
 
RLKurth wrote:
Should all beginning photographers start out with a film camera to learn how to shoot? Here's 10 reasons why this may be true.

1. It’s so old-fashioned, it makes you look cool. Enough said.

2. Film is unforgiving – it demands hard work, as well as some trial and error, to get a good exposure.

3. No automatic settings. You must become familiar with the principles of exposure, or suffer blank frames.

4. Exposure – If your camera is of an age before light meters were invented, you may have to use the “Sunny 16&#8243; rule of thumb to gauge what settings you should be using (in full sun, your exposure will be f/16 at a
shutter speed equivalent to your ISO – 1/100th sec at 100 ISO, 1/400th sec at 400 ISO, etc).

5. Manual focus – you must consider which part of the picture should be in focus, rather than letting the camera hook on to some random spot.

6. Nobody will steal it. Even previously high-end film cameras aren’t worth much anymore.

7. The ISO isn’t auto. With digital, the effect of ISO has been largely forgotten by many, but because you have to use the same ISO throughout a roll, you have to come to understand its role in your exposure.

8. Slow you down. Manual settings, as well as the consumption of valuable film, forces you to put more thought into each shot, which has obvious positive effects on the learning process.

9. Cheap gear – everyone thinks film is dead, so you can pick up your equipment for a song, or sometimes for nothing at all.

10. No need to upgrade – there are very few film cameras in production anymore (though there are some), leaving you to think about your photographs instead of your equipment. Not to mention that in the days of
film, cameras were built to last a lifetime, rather than the short wait until the company’s next release.
Should all beginning photographers start out with ... (show quote)


I agree one of the best ways I learned was to take the battery out of my Nikkormat! Talk about a good deal ebay has a Leica R4 for $239 and a Nikon F1 at $119.

Reply
 
 
Jun 8, 2013 21:56:06   #
twowindsbear
 
FredB wrote:
It seems that nearly all the people who recommend learning to shoot using a film camera are not recommending it because of any perceived advantage of the mechanical device itself, but because of the nostalgic smell of developer. I find this odd.

No one has yet demonstrated any real, concrete advantage of a manual film camera over a manual digital camera in terms of the learning experience.

No one has yet produced one specific feature of a manual film camera that should be learned by a beginner that can not be duplicated with a digital camera.


OK - Explain to me ho to make a multi-exposure image with my Nikon P500 the way I could with my Nikormat FTn. NO PP allowed!

Emotional and olfactory memories are not admissible evidence in this particular case.

Those of you who claim to be able to tell the difference between an image taken on film and an image captured by a light sensor are delusional.
It seems that nearly all the people who recommend ... (show quote)

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 21:56:46   #
philo Loc: philo, ca
 
Darkroom317 wrote:
Digital is expensive


the difference between a man and a boy is the price of his toys. I would hate to tell you the price of my toys.

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 22:03:47   #
infocus Loc: Australia
 
Shutter Bugger wrote:
Would that be rolls of 18, 24, or 36 frames?


What does it matter? A roll of film has but one ISO. I said if you wanted to use 5 different ISO's you'd need 5 different rolls of film. what's your point?

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 22:04:42   #
FredB Loc: A little below the Mason-Dixon line.
 
Darkroom317 wrote:
No it has a technical advantage. That is resolution and depth. Average digital cannot match medium or large format film yet. Medium format digital is expensive.
While there may be some slight perceptual difference between large format film and average digital (such as about $10,000 in cost...), none of your points have anything to do with the use of a manual film camera as a teaching device.

Reply
 
 
Jun 8, 2013 22:05:09   #
twowindsbear
 
In all the posts mentioning "instant gratifcation" there has been NO mention of using Polaroid film for proofs. Most "high end" camera systems ha a provision for shooting Polaroid film - Nikon F, Hassy, Mamiay 6 x7, 4x5, 8x10 come to mind. You did have to wait about a minute.

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 22:06:30   #
Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN
 
infocus wrote:
What does it matter? A roll of film has but one ISO. I said if you wanted to use 5 different ISO's you'd need 5 different rolls of film. what's your point?


Just change film backs

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 22:07:17   #
Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN
 
FredB wrote:
While there may be some slight perceptual difference between large format film and average digital (such as about $10,000 in cost...), none of your points have anything to do with the use of a manual film camera as a teaching device.


For me to buy a digital kit equivalent of my format film kit it would cost me $60,000+

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 22:08:36   #
Pepsiman Loc: New York City
 
Dlevon wrote:
But at least in the old days you could take pictures without the use of batteries and/or need electricity to charge them up. We are too reliant on that now. Someday there's going to be a major solar flare that's gonna wipe out all operating systems on the earth for long time. Then let's see how many pictures you all-take. Yep, I've been watching Star Trek too long!


Star Trek! That's yesterday.. Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon were long ago. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
 
 
Jun 8, 2013 22:11:44   #
FredB Loc: A little below the Mason-Dixon line.
 
Darkroom317 wrote:
For me to buy a digital kit equivalent of my format film kit it would cost me $60,000+
Ok. Now explain to me how that makes it better to learn on manual film versus manual digital? You're talking FEATURE, not benefit. So your big old film camera would cost $60,000 to duplicate on digital. No one is recommending that beginners learn on medium or large format film cameras. The original post by Digital Rev, quoted by the OP, was a half-hearted attempt at humor, that postulated that an 35 year old Oly film camera should be the tool that all beginners learn how to shoot with. None of his "10 reasons" make any sense whatsoever, and he's full of chinese bullcrap.

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 22:13:39   #
Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN
 
I am advocating learning large format after learning a bit of 35mm

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 22:17:46   #
WAL
 
Light meters where on cameras in “Zeiss) Germany in the late1930’s Minolta and canon introduced auto focus, auto exposure and much of what we have now during the film era.
The film cameras may cost little, processing is expensive. I am nostalgic for the old days, but I don’t think it was easier to learn. Ansel Adams used Polaroid to get quick feed back for his students. Digital does that without cost.
Still there is some thing missing with the new world. The old way seemed peaceful, in the dark, tilting the tray. It was a spiritual experience. Things where black and white. Photoshop’s layers are not doing it for me. Magic when it works, frustrating when it doesn’t I need to smell the fixer.

Reply
Jun 8, 2013 22:18:05   #
sam slade
 
Bingo! You can learn to compose a picture without reverting to glass plates and a pan of flash powder. You can learn to compose the picture, and take it, and review it on the spot. If you don't like it, you can correct your mistake right away, instead of waiting on the processing lab, and trying to remember everything about that day and that scene. IF done with a little control, you can learn at least as fast as if you had gone back to the days of film.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 9 of 16 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.