Anyone still using film? (Page 8): yep! I know a lot of photographers that started with digital. Most of them shoot multi frames and edit later in PS. The mantra of 'fix it in...

fhayes Loc: Madison, Tennessee

rmalarz wrote:

This brings up a good point. Film teaches one to plan, be ready, be meticulous. Sloppiness isn't rewarded.

I wonder how many people these days have the approach of "I can fix it in Ps". Oh, and I happen to love the smell of fixer.
--Bob

yep! I know a lot of photographers that started with digital. Most of them shoot multi frames and edit later in PS.
The mantra of 'fix it in photoshop can be annoying at times. I shoot digital the same way I shoot film, like I have X number of frames and to pay attention to what is the next shot going to look like?

I like the smell of fixer too, along with mixing dry chemicals. The entire experience is magic!

rkaminer Loc: New York, NY

This is amazing, so many responses about film and I thought film belonged in the museum. All these discussions encouraged made to dust off my old Leica F and Nikon FTN cameras. Can someone help me find the menu on these cameras? I am having trouble turning them on; probably the batteries are dead since I have not used them for a while.

dadaist

HamB wrote:

What is film?

Film is what collects on windows that are fogged up1

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Film is what occurs on your teeth when you don't brush.

Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida

HILARIOUS......me too every once in a Blue Moon.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

rmalarz wrote:

This brings up a good point. Film teaches one to plan, be ready, be meticulous. Sloppiness isn't rewarded.

I wonder how many people these days have the approach of "I can fix it in Ps". Oh, and I happen to love the smell of fixer.
--Bob

I do not miss the rashes I got from Dektol print developer and E6 stabilizer... or from wearing the latex gloves I was allergic to.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Bill, I've been fortunate in that I have little or no reaction to the chemicals I use, or have used. I've never done E6 so that is an unknown.
--Bob

burkphoto wrote:

I do not miss the rashes I got from Dektol print developer and E6 stabilizer... or from wearing the latex gloves I was allergic to.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

rmalarz wrote:

Bill, I've been fortunate in that I have little or no reaction to the chemicals I use, or have used. I've never done E6 so that is an unknown.
--Bob

E6 has evolved since I ran a sink line in my AV days. Back in the early 1980s, the stabilizer was full of formaldehyde. NASTY stuff.

DentonBard Loc: North Texas

YES! I still use film almost exclusively. With the exception of my iPhone, I don’t own a digital camera. Mainly I use prewar 120 folders, and 6.5x9 and 9x12 sheet film cameras. Processing I do with a Paterson tank in my bathroom, and printing I do as cyanotype. When I scan my negatives I use my iPhone and the Filmlab app. (I’m in my early 50s, so not quite a fossil, I’m definitely not rich by American standards, and I DEFINITELY don’t live in Brooklyn! 😆)

Haden123

JohnSwanda wrote:

That ignores the cost of the film camera.

It also ignores the cost of making prints: at least one dollar per print (cost of paper) plus chemicals and dark room supplies.

rkaminer Loc: New York, NY

During my film picture-taking days I was very frugal and chose when to take the picture carefully; the cost of film, developing and printing was expensive. It took a long time to shed this habit when I went digital. I am still somewhat conservative when taking multiple images of the same subject; not sure if this is a good or bad habit. Certainly saves time erasing most of the duplicates pictures, but the price is right.

anotherview Loc: California

Good morning. I have to address the notion that film-era photographers took more care to prepare for an exposure than do digital-photographers. In a word, Baloney!

Being self-taught, I found plenty of advice in my study for properly composing, framing, and balancing the content of a given photograph. As a result, few of my photographs require more than a minor cropping.

The meter display in a digital camera can also aid the photographer to arrive at a good exposure. The photographer can take one shot and then examine it for any needed exposure adjustment.

And so on.

rkaminer wrote:

During my film picture-taking days I was very frugal and chose when to take the picture carefully; the cost of film, developing and printing was expensive. It took a long time to shed this habit when I went digital. I am still somewhat conservative when taking multiple images of the same subject; not sure if this is a good or bad habit. Certainly saves time erasing most of the duplicates pictures, but the price is right.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The best thing about film is your memories get better even if the pictures didn't.

RRiggins Loc: Colorado Springs

BebuLamar wrote:

I think hipsters use mirrorless.

Nope. Hipsters use phones with 5 lenses and no sense. With all those cameras, where do they put the phone?

Old Dutch

I see you are from CA. What a surprise. Rather sweepingly dismissive, perhaps?
Film still has its place, especially among the Hollywood set when they want to make a real Movie. Spielberg, et al, still use it, and will continue to do so because it is well, better in some applications. As do hordes of aficianado's across the globe, for the same reason.

But, I suppose we should all just go away now and submit to the relentless tide of, well, opinion. I will keep my F4, though, and use it only in the dark.