| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/06/2012 08:31:33 PM · #26 |
| I'm almost 56 and spent decades with film cameras starting with a Kodak Brownie, through a variety of Canon, Nikon, and Leica 35mm cameras, Yashica and Mamiya medium-format, and a few view cameras. I used to buy my Ilford HP5 in 100-foot bulk rolls and load my own cassettes. And then spent countless hours in the darkroom printing on good old Agfa Portriga 111 (finishing with Kodak Selenium Toner). Those were good days. As much as I appreciate the magic and romance of the "classic" chemistry-based technique, and as much as I admire the amazing images produced in the 20th century, I can't imagine going back to that after experiencing the many advantages of digital photography. |
|
|
|
12/06/2012 09:01:12 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by snaffles:
Cool to see what equipment and lenses have stayed and which have come and gone...like the 'sideways lens' which supposedly allowed you to discreetly shoot strangers, because it looked like the camera and lens was pointed at another potential subject. |
I'm pretty sure you can get one of those now -- I'm almost positive I've seen someone post a link to one here quite some time ago ... |
Maybe they've made the vast hole in the side of the lens a little bit smaller? :-) |
Nope - it's huge. I bought one of these a few years back and ended up giving it away to  Samantha_T in a contest of some sort.
I shot film for many years and JUMPED on digital as soon as it came out. I have no regrets, nor do I miss the processing costs. |
|
|
|
12/06/2012 09:31:30 PM · #28 |
OK, I have a question and let me know if I need to start a new thread. My mom passed in '95 and I got my dad's camera, he passed in '88. It is a Canon Canonet and has a roll of Kodak C41 Kodacolor, 400ASA, 24 exposure in it. Where is the best place to get it processed?
Next is to try and shoot with it!! |
|
|
|
12/06/2012 09:39:32 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
I still have my Pentax K-1000 and f1.8 50mm. I had a lot of fun with that camera. |
I would have to check, but I do believe I have two of those along with a series of lens from my younger days. :O)
Ray |
|
|
|
12/06/2012 10:03:12 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by snaffles:
Recently I was given a box full of books on photography, namely the entire Life Library of Photography. Publication date, 1972. These books are probably older than most site members!
It's a helluva an eye-opener to go through these books and images and be reminded of what a true blending of art and science that defined pure photography. Pretty much manual everything - motorized cameras were prohibitively expensive. The artistry of being able to get a shot, or shots, without being able to chimp and use in-camera settings. Being able to develop your own film, know how to use enlargers, etc. The problems photogs had to face when shooting in extreme environments and had to deal with shutter blades seizing up, etc.
And of course the core principles are all there, along with tricks like reverse-mounting lenses and what would now be museum pieces, like a 25-lb low-level light system. The mind boggles at how the photo world use to be, and how far we've come. |
Those books were my bible. I have a set of 'em here. And just about everything they teach is no than it was in the 1970's... A lot of it is less RELEVANT, given the hegira from film to digital, but at the core level none of the principles have changed. |
Yep, that's exactly what I'm seeing. Fun to marvel at the shots and gape at the amount of gear and vast technical knowledge they had back then - a pic of a prof at a university with a Photography program pouring chemicals into a waist-high vat of developer being one of many - but the principles are rock-solid. Those principles are what I'm winnowing out of them. Cool to see what equipment and lenses have stayed and which have come and gone...like the 'sideways lens' which supposedly allowed you to discreetly shoot strangers, because it looked like the camera and lens was pointed at another potential subject. Sneaky stuff!
BTW Bear, was your collection also the 1972 edition? Don't know if I have them all, but I have a lot. |
Are the covers mostly silver with a black spine? I'm wondering if that's what I have (I'm too lazy to go upstairs and check.)
|
|
|
|
12/06/2012 10:09:48 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by kawesttex:
OK, I have a question and let me know if I need to start a new thread. My mom passed in '95 and I got my dad's camera, he passed in '88. It is a Canon Canonet and has a roll of Kodak C41 Kodacolor, 400ASA, 24 exposure in it. Where is the best place to get it processed?
Next is to try and shoot with it!! |
c41 is still developed in tons of places. Unless you're looking for a super high quality result, I'd just use a local drug store or whatever like Walgreens. If you really like some of them you can always get them printed later at a higher quality. |
|
|
|
12/06/2012 10:25:03 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by kawesttex:
OK, I have a question and let me know if I need to start a new thread. My mom passed in '95 and I got my dad's camera, he passed in '88. It is a Canon Canonet and has a roll of Kodak C41 Kodacolor, 400ASA, 24 exposure in it. Where is the best place to get it processed?
Next is to try and shoot with it!! |
c41 is still developed in tons of places. Unless you're looking for a super high quality result, I'd just use a local drug store or whatever like Walgreens. If you really like some of them you can always get them printed later at a higher quality. |
Thanks! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/29/2025 12:41:02 PM EDT.
