oldeman Loc: Cape Cod, MA

Used 35mm, 2 1/4, 4x5, 8x10, 8mm, 16mm, each in their own way. Developed/printed b/w and color neg/reversal. (almost forgot 20x30 graphic camera).

Impressionist

Omega

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Great idea. I'm heading to Chit-Chat. :D

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

i sent a lot of hate mail to rochester over that!

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Great old times! I shot film for most of my life starting many years ago when I was a youngster. I began to use digital around 2002. Always a Nikon person.
I shot many rolls of Kodachrome in my lifetime and I still tend to favor the colors of the first generation of Nikon digital cameras. I had Tri-X and T-Max 100 as my favorite b&w films.
It is a nostalgic past! Digital has made things easier and in my particular case has made my life easier when I take a file to be printed since I know for sure that I will get back exactly what I have edited in the file. We depended on a technician years back and many times his interpretation was not ours.
Film is now expensive and finding a lab to process and print film is not easy.
I still have film in my freezer.

dusty3d Loc: South Florida

I had made a hodge podge darkroom to develop my prints and film. I would roll my film from 100' reel into 36 exp. rolls in my closet. All B&W of course.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

With Panatomic in the camera and a zone system guide scotch taped to my spotmeter I could capture anything that caught my eye.

d2b2 Loc: Catonsville, Maryland, USA

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

ligneus

Tri X and D76.

Blasthoff Loc: Life halved NY and IN

Tri X and HC110

kbarnes42 Loc: North Carolina

I used film much longer than digital. Had my own darkroom for processing black and white and E6 slide film. Quite a learning curve going to digital, but enjoy it.

MontanaTrace

In the 80's I would put on Apple computer controlled slide shows. One show with 22 projectors. Special racks of projectors. Fog machines, stereo sound, 30' of screens taped together. Audiences could hear the projectors clicking as rapid images created motion. Beams of light coming from the back. Those were good old days.

James R. Kyle Loc: Saint Louis, Missouri (A Suburb of Ferguson)

I still work in "film"... 35mm, Medium-Format, 4X5 and 8X10.

And Digital as well -- Canon 5D Mark II = (I use two of those as I do Not like changing lenses and the chance of Missing a shot). Canon 7D as a "back-up" camera -- and a Canon XTi converted to IR Only.

I have "transcended" that film and manual camera knowledge to the Digital Photographic era.

When I teach I use digital as that is what the students bring. However, I tape Down their "Mode" dial to Manual for the time I am teaching them to "Work A Camera". AND I have then use my Hand-Held Spot Meter to calculate the exposure.

If You Can ...

Why Not Do It All with photography?

16mmguy

I have been a professional photographer for 50 years (travel for State of Michigan government and over 400 weddings). I used film for 40 years (countless bricks of Kodachrome 135-36, Portra 220 color neg and Kodak Vision for documentaries). Sure miss it, especially Kodachrome. Almost cried when Kodak announced they were discontinuing it. Retired after 40 years, stayed retired for 2 weeks (!) before I was more or less drafted into a news photography job. Have been doing that for 10 years, and that, of course, is digital. Wasn't very impressed at first, but as the years rolled on and technology improved, so did my opinion about pro SLRs. The latest ones are great. They give you plenty of latitude and are relatively easy to use (you can change parameters on the fly by hitting a button or two). A photographer's way of thinking is different between film and digital. You can overexpose film if necessary, never underexpose, but it is the reverse for digital. I use a Nikon D810 for myself, and A D750, D700 and D300s for the job, but, you know, my fav camera is, believe it or not, the D200 with that great CCD chip. Rumor has it that MOS has surpassed CCD, but they still use CCD chips in professional studio camera costing tens of thousands of dollars. I think the CCD is a lot like film, nice and soft, flattering flesh tones, etc. The Nikon D300 and 310 are real workhorses, are built well and last a long time and are a little lighter. I use both my (very old) D200 and D300 and D310 for the job quite often. They are not that heavy and easy to tote around (I found out real quick weight is important, especially if you are carrying the camera around for 8 or so hours with a heavy lens attached). But I still remember my old film days very fondly. The Kodak Portra series films were the most beautiful color negative films Kodak ever made. Natural color, 5 stops of latitude, fine grain... beautiful stuff, very flattering skin tones. Also, I felt pretty bad when my pro color lab of 30 years folded, pushed out by digital technology. That was a sad day, too. It was important to trust a lab and know exactly what they could do. Communication with the lab was very important. So digital is fast approaching film. Of course, the most important thing is the glass. Great glass. That you gotta have. Anyway, I'm moving on but still remembering the good old days of film.

thix2112

Taught myself how to develop using HC110 about 2 years ago which has allowed me to build and use a great collection of old cameras. Decided to develop my own when I came across my old Pentax Super Program sitting in the back of my closet.