> Don't you wish. <g>
Well, my film/processing costs are running $500-750 per year for the past
three years. I use digital for the bulk of turn-and-burn stuff which 5mp
serves just fine. Film for everything else. As mentioned before, film has
allowed me to avoid upgrade costs for the digital gear. Film has also
allowed me to rediscover the photographer part of me that really enjoys the
process.
My contributing writer, Artist-Photographer Michel Szulc Kyzyzanowski, is in
the midst of shooting a book project which is taking him to multiple
countries around the world. For this specific project he's shooting it
entirely with a Hasselblad and B&W film. Just a few days ago, his custom lab
and processing guru showed him the results from the first couple countries.
Michel is extremely pleased and is observing that there is a quality to the
images which just isn't happening today with digital. We had talked at
length before the project during the planning phase about which camera
technologies to use for this. Shooting film was a $15000 decision, but it
was the right decision.
When it comes to film, our options are getting fewer and fewer all the time,
but the surviving options are excellent. Not only that, but the latest films
from Kodak, Ektar 100 and Portra 400, are so much better than anything we
had ten years ago. Film technology has NOT stood still and is still
advancing.
Sure, shooting film is "inconvenient" and all that jazz, but there is no
doubt that we've gone backwards in our camera technology. Viewfinders are
often times horrid today (and even the good ones still have no
manual-focusing aids), metering systems have to have exposure compensation
applied, dynamic range is stunted, colors are bland, batteries exhaust,
lenses are huge, and on and on and on...
I absolutely love using the OM system and get much joy out of it. Digital
photography is an iterative process. Film photography is an anticipation
process. Two totally different working methods. Now that I've learned how to
shoot "Leica style", the OM system is even more precious than it was before.
Honestly, now. If I was to buy a brand-new digital system that was the
equivalent to my OM kit, how many TENS of thousands of dollars would it run?
I'm very thankful for the generosity of others in making this kit possible,
but at the same time it is sad that it has become possible because of the
abandonment of the system.
Yesterday, I posted an image on Zone-10 of the Maytag Repairman (statue). In
a way, this is an anachronism. Maytag no longer exists, the repairman
advertising campaign long since retired by Whirlpool, and the photograph was
taken with film on an OM system. (sorry about the lousy store scan). I took
the shot during lunch, dropped the roll off at Walgreens and had the image
posted in the evening after work. (My scanner was at home, so no quality
scan done). Metering was done with a handheld Sekonic L-508 meter with the
ambient dome. Out of curiosity, I did verify my exposure with multi-spot
metering to make sure than the entire dynamic range of the scene was
comfortably within limits, but ended up using the same exposure.
The next shot, which I haven't posted yet, was of an empty pool. The bright
and harsh sunlight was shining off the white paint of the pool AND I was
shooting into the sun. I took a single spot reading of the white pool,
pressed the HiLight button and fired. Perfect exposure and no blown out
spots at all. Oh, and the shadows and forest in the background weren't black
either. No digital camera, other than MAYBE the Nikon D3 would have gotten
that exposure correct and even then, the image would have required work to
be usable due the extreme brightness range.
All this from a recently received OM-4T, 100/2 lens and a roll of Ektar 100.
But it comes down to choices. Does one choose to front-load costs or does
one choose to pay on the consumption side? Either way, it's going to cost
about the same. I do wish that I had digital available during the "50,000
hours" phase, as I could have probably saved thousands upon thousands of
dollars in film and processing developing my skills. I easily spent $30,000
on film and processing during that window of time and much of that was "at
cost" from working at the lab. Chances are, however, that I would have still
spent $30,000 on upgrading gear.
Yes, Moose, the Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|