Those of you who shoot 35mm slides.

Discussion in 'Film and Processing' started by raymondc, Feb 13, 2010.

  1. What's been your reason to still shoot them?
    I've been with digital shooting RAW of course but PP has never done much PP.
    I started shooting some slides this year. They been in the freezer for some time. I like how you only got a certain amount of shots, plus I am a scape photographer on low volume. A roll last me a month - lol. When I get the slides back they look great, the colors pop, you can see the results before you leave the lab. No PP required other than matching slide. Plus of course when the slide is back lighted.
     
  2. I shoot slides because I love how they scan and I can match the true colors with my eye.
     
  3. I started out shooting color print film 30 years ago and quickly became unhappy with the quality so a friend who got me started in 35mm photography gave me a roll of Kodachrome 64 and said try this and tell me what you think.I was so blown away that I've never looked back.The realism even back then was outstanding, it was like being back at the original scene looking at it with my own eyes once again.It is ironic today because we have some of the highest quality E6 film ever offered yet the E6 structure is in collapse.So many people have been enchanted by digital that they don't even know what options are out there - a lot like me 30 years ago.Don't get me wrong digital is great stuff and I'm sure at some point will obsolete film completely due to marketing forces but I fear we will have lost forever one of the best and many photogaphers will hang up the cameras when it is gone.Our modern world is too quick to dismiss everything from the past as being oboslete when a new technology comes along.
     
  4. Well when my freezer is empty I will quit and send all my film cameras to a Museum so they can throw them away because I can't do that.
     
  5. After several years of black and white roll fim photography, developed and printed in a converted closet in my family home I moved out of state to a rented room with no darkroom capability. I bought a new Retina I and a roll of Kodachrome. Never moved back to the old home or black and white again.
     
  6. I do my own B&W in a 2 room apartment with a Dark bag a daylight tank and aV700 scanner...
     
  7. Les that is all? Without a lens that is nothing but a manual bunch of mouse traps. :) Kidding.
     
  8. SCL

    SCL

    I grew up with slide film and bulk rolls of B&W. I'm finishing off my freezer of slide film this year.
     
  9. I have some 400 and 1000 foot rolls of bulk B&W movie film so I can if nothing make developer and fix them in pool chemicals... If I have too.
     
  10. I know Les but I had to jab as I have that many in 35mm and about that much in MF.... Not to mention the full collection... Though soon to be selling off as I have jus got to find the carpet under my feet....
     
  11. les, you have a lot of shelf space i take it! would love to see a picture of the storage facility for these beauties. are they all in use?
     
  12. Just got a working Auto winder for my Mamya Z series for 1 $ today.... Nice move Larry LOL
     
  13. Nikon is selling it order only.... Ain't that a bitch..... So much money could have been made if they kept the 5000 alive... and pushed Epson... Epson won Plustek moved out and is now moving back with old nothing.
     
  14. Am at an age where digital imagery means nothing, it may as well be colour print film, which it is to all intent.
    Slides, I share with others of railways. We are all of a similar age, over 40 under 100 years of age and we all still use slide film. Now granted processing is a often a pain however the box returns from the processor, is opened, "absorb the smell"
    and the images loaded in the stack loader and reviewed. Discards in one pile, keepers in another.
    In my area we still have a monthly slide show to about twenty or thirty of the faithful, who either have current slides, or slides taken in some cases 50 or more years prior.
    Most slides are still Kodachrome although not for long, with Fuji Sensia and Provia pushing Kodak away.
    I have a digital camera however there is something about the permanance of film, which a digital image, stored can never
    become.
     
  15. jtk

    jtk

    I'd keep shooting Astia if I still had overnight processing by a real lab. I don't, so 35mm is now B&W only..I'm very happy with my B&W silver scans with Nikon V... (zero reason to shoot color neg, risking careless lab handling and bad chemistry, when DSLR/RAW is so much better visually in virtually all situations and undoubtedly more "archival").
     
  16. Mr. Ray...

    First there was Eastman with the slogan "You push the button, we do the rest". That was so non-photographers could play with a camera. Eastman preloaded the film, developed and printed it for you. Later there was the Instamatic 126 and later, with crappier results, the Instamatic 110 and the beloved Disc Camera (complete with tiny film chips). Then along came the Girliemen with the APS system. Today non-photographers have digital.

    The short answer: Real men still use film.

    ATB
     
  17. I use and develop my own B&W and E-6. I do have a real good lab here in town that can do my E-6 in 4 hours. I'm probably going back to having them do my E-6. I don't own anything other than film cameras. So until film is no more or my photography business takes off and I have to go digital, I will shoot 70% E-6 30% B&W!
     
  18. Because I still enjoy "making the photo in the camera" and not having to muck about with post production processing just to get the colours anywhere near accurate. (In this respect it was most interesting to hear the many comments by newer (digital user) members of my camera club after a recent showing of the results of the "100% Pure" national slide competition that we run. They just couldn't get over the colours and quality of the work shown!)
    I do use digital for some work (especially like a Polaroid to sort out the composition etc before reverting to film) but prefer slide film (Velvia 100F) for my 'serious' photography. The only draw back is the cost - up to $1.50 every time one presses the shutter.
     
  19. I like Elitechrome. Nice film and less than $5.00 a roll for the 100 speed. It's still being made which is good. Processing is 40miles from the house so that is always a challenge. Once this last lab goes out of business I will be finished with E-6. I guess at that point I will just shoot my digital camera. It works very good also. I am finished with mini labs, CostCo and what have you for C41. Their work is just not good enough for me.
     
  20. nothing scans like chrome! it gives a look that i can't acheive with print film or with a digicam. the images have the appearance of depth and a 3D'ility, at least to my eye.
    [​IMG]
     
  21. i sail, play guitar through a tube amp, like vinyl... might as well shoot film! I like the tangibility and the results. The end process for me is scanning/digital so the process still sucks, but i prefer the results.
     
  22. I still shoot slides is because I like to use them to make Polaroid/Fuji instant film transfers.
     
  23. Hi there, Ray - I shoot slide film because of its lovely, nuanced colors, highlight gradation, and natural, organic look. My favorite is Fuji Astia 100F (because it's great for portraits, in particular).
    I have a gallery of 8x10 portraits of our 5 year old daughter displayed in my office at work - some digital, some film, both color and B&W, all taken by available light, scanned, and printed at home on my HP 7960.
    The one that draws the most comment was taken on Astia - "How did you get those colors / highlights / skin tone?"
    'Nuff said - as you yourself already know!
     
  24. Well. No particular reason, I guess.
     
  25. Because it's almost like being there again. I've shot mostly Kodachrome since 1981 and some Velvia. I like to project them and like the scans. Now I shoot mainly Velvia 100 and some Velvia 50. I don't shoot much, if any, slide film in the winter but if there was B&W slide film, I'd try that.
    A lady just gave me about 40 rolls of freezer kept slide film. A lot of original Velvia, I've experienced that and can't wait for spring to shoot some. I don't know anything about the characteristics of the others below. I need to determine what these would be good for.
    Provia 400, 400F and 100F
    Sensia 100 and 200
     
  26. Slides are just plain old amazing. They speak wonders. The images pop right off of them. Even when scanned they give great images. Plus it is something tangable. It is an archival medium which will be here unless you burn it or just throw it away. Plus the cameras to shoot film are great. I like everything about them. Slides don't have a good exposure latitude so they are a great way to make sure that you are good at exposure.
     
  27. "if there was B&W slide film, I'd try that."
    There once was Agfa Scala
     
  28. There is also the Dr5 lab which takes almost all black and white neg films and makes slides out of them.
     
  29. My main reason for shooting slide film is just curiosity...I had never used slides before.

    When I found out Kodachrome was going to disappear, I figured I needed to try it at least ONCE, just to see what it was like. When I got my slides back in the mail, I was completely blown away. I've always used film, but this was the first time I had ever even seen slide film. And I got hooked.

    Well, here...THIS is why I started (and continued) shooting slides!

    http://www.photo.net/film-and-processing-forum/00T90j
     
  30. "if there was B&W slide film, I'd try that."
    There once was Agfa Scala
    There now is Rollei Slide Direct
    http://macodirect.de/rollei-slide-direct-c-1_6_56_264.html
     
  31. I can't help noticing that the word 'FREEZER' is used an awful lot here.
    On a short break to Madrid last March my younger son was astounded when I opted to pack my Minolta Dynax 7 and Fuji Velvia in preference to my recently-acquired Sony Alpha 700. We have just returned from another Madrid trip and again, the 35mm camera was used.
    The truth of the matter is - digital photography has made us lazy. One St. Valentine's day present my wife would like is more room in her refrigerator !
    Why do I still shoot them ? the bright colours I suppose, that and the incredible sharpness when projected on a big screen.
    Now where are my E6 chemicals ?
     
  32. I would have probably switched to digital last year if DSLR makers wouldn't have started offering DSLRs with HD shooting. For stills, cameras like a Nikon D700 or Canon EOS 5D Mk II would be good enough for me. I find the video shooting very tempting, but it's still not good enough in today's DSLRs. I will wait until
    - large sensor cameras (full frame DSLR like, although I don't absolutely need the mirror) are capable of full HD video shooting at reasonable frame rates - and to me, "reasonable" for HD would be something in the 100+ fps range. Rendition of rapid movements in current HD is just plain inacceptable in my opinion. I'm watching HDTV since its early (analog) start in the late 80's (in Japan) and never understood how the designers could increase resolution on the screen surface so drastically (compared to SDTV) without adequately increasing the resolution in time. Interestingly, James Cameron recently expressed similar thoughts - thank you, James, you give me hope! I hope you're heard by the industry!
    - an autofocus working well (fast, continuously) also in video mode
    - a wide range powerzoom (e.g. 20 - 400mm - yes for me it needs to start at such a strong wideangle) is offered for such a camera. For me this would be an additional lens specialized for the video shooting - it needs to be good enough for the 2 megapixels required in full HD, but it doesn't need to be as good as lenses for 12 or more megapixel that stills are taken with should be
    - players and / or TVs capable to play such high frame rate HD movies are available
    - computers and software can deal with such video streams.
    There are also some reasons why I still prefer to shoot slides for stills as well, that's
    - there is no digital equivalent to a slide projector, at least no affordable alternative with a similar resolution and
    - portrait mode (!!! - can't emphasize this enough)
    - I have doubts that I'll manage to keep my digital photos alive over several decades - who knows if I'm smart enough to make backups often enough, and even if I do, if I'll be able to retrieve them should my computer ever crash.
    - who knows if a computer in 25 years can still read and show Jpegs, Tiffs or, particularly, current camera's RAWs.
    A slide sits on the shelf and unless there is a fire or flooding will look much like today in 25 years from now. And, no, they don't need to be Kodachromes - I have E6 slides from the mid 80's when I started taking pictures which still look good.
    All this wouldn't probably stop me from switching to digital - in contrast to you,
    - I don't "like how you only got a certain amount of shots"
    - I don't like to wait for the films to process,
    - I hate having to scan them
    - I'd rather save the money spent on films, and
    - I'd love to switch ISO on the fly whenever I need to.
    Anyway, overall digital isn't quite the way I want it yet, so I keep shooting slides.
     
  33. So many great reasons for shooting slides! I hope some of the digital shooters sitting on the fence give it a try at least once.From the day digital arrived on the scene there has been so much spin and vague promises connected with it versus the reality that it is still a developing technology.I agree entirely with all who question the archive properties because the manufacturers really dance around this issue yet none of them have a clue (then again maybe they do) to how usable those files and software will be a decade from now.As for the human factor just talk with your elderly parents or grandparents (especially if dementia has started to take a toll) for any length of time and imagine yourself in their shoes trying to manage your photographic archive.For me,I sleep better at night knowing most of my history is stored on a physical slide and not in binary code on a IC chip based system.One of the few advantages of getting 'old',most of my stuff was shot on film before the whole world changed.
     
  34. Les, Great Answer ;-)
    You made me laugh.
    I guess many of us have accumulated great cameras over the years, but my hat is off to you for such a large collection!
     
  35. But back to Ray's original question: I shoot slide film because the results look great, right out of the box, no PP required, but even more importantly, because of the AMAZING IMPACT and WOW factor you get when projected. Ray, if you dont yet have a slide projector, pick up a used one - they are very inexpensive now. It will be one of the best photographic purchases you have ever made.
    And I guarantee you, you will be stunned when you see your shots blown up to 60 Inches / 2 meters size, with such vibrant, brilliant colors.
     
  36. I shoot 35mm and medium format slides and blow my mind by projecting them on a 60"X60" screen with a Rollei universal projector, you can keep digital imaging it's just a passing craze that will disappear like hula hoops, yoyos, and deely boppers, slides rule.
     
  37. I would probably shoot more E6 if it weren't so obscenely expensive to process (again, I understand the rise in processing prices as places that process the film have had lower volume). It doesn't pain me at all to buy 10 rolls of slide film for something like 5-7 dollars on BH, but the kicker is when I have to pay $14 for each roll to get processed (and not even mounted!) sheesh. I'm considering sending it off to a larger commercial lab at this point and just having to pay $9.
     
  38. I shoot slides with my EOS 3 because I like "full frame" format and the unique way each film renders the colors: it's like changing every time the sensor's characteristics :) If you want to understand better this concept, please look at my portfolio: photo.net/photos/dallalb
    I shoot slides mainly for scanning purpose, because I like to take advantages of the digital benefits in post production...
    I’m not interested in shooting a huge number of photos, but I prefer to work on quality and to refine my ability of synthesis: shooting with film can help to achieve this purpose, since every frame has a real cost and you cannot preview the result on the field. I scan and spend time in editing only my best shots. An ideal goal would be shooting only one frame to fully describe the visual potential of a scene and to fully convey my message.
    Alberto.
     
  39. Alberto, you have some beautiful work in your PN portfolio. Thanks for sharing.
     
  40. Amazing colors, 3D depth,
     
  41. Les & Larry,
    I kind of missed your earlier comment that Nikon has discontinued the 5000 Series Scanner and they are 'offering' only the 9000 ($2600) on a special order basis?What big hearted guys they are.I don't want to hear the old PR garbage "marketing forces" made us do it, this sounds like a load of crap to go digital slr or else.How come they were always back order status if nobody wanted one?I own one plus a Canon 4000US.What do you guys suggest as a replacement down the road?I'll go commercial scanning before I ever buy another product from either of them.Kill off all the film bodies first then the film scanners,what better way to force them into the digital camp like it or not.At this point it would make sense for Kodak and Fuji to join with a third party and produce your own scanners in order to sell more film because it is clear these guys (Nikon,Canon,Sony) could care less if you survive.
     
  42. Well with there knowledge of scanners you would think Epson would jump in on this. Though then again it could end up like when Cadillac started making sports cars.... :)
     
  43. You'd think Kodak or Fuji would too.
     
  44. I have many of the same reasons as the above - fantastic color, great sense of depth, lovely "feel" that seems to evade digital still. I also like how shooting film period slows you down a little bit (though it also speeds you up...no more damn chimping!). At the end of the day, though, I'm finding that my 6x6 slides are just far sexier than 35mm :) 4x5, anyone??
     
  45. I still shoot slides, though I do not cut them apart and mount them, just leave them in strips like negatives, because the quality I believe still surpasses digital. The hardest part about it is still finding local labs what will do E-6 processing.
     
  46. What do you mean with this question? I mean, if I do not shoot slide (Velvia 50 in summer, 100 at winter) what should I use with my Nikon F2A and F5?? Or with my Mamiya 645 Pro?? And please don't think that I am a old traditionalist, who has these cameras from my youth. My Nikon F2A, my pride and joy together with the 6 prime Nikkors I use with it, were bought about 9 months ago (OK, I admit, I had an F2 Photomic for 15 years, starting at the tender age of 17). Why?
    For a very simple reason, you just can't get the colors you get with Kodachrome (now obsolete) or Velvia with any digital camera without a lot of post-processing and a lot of trial and error. Of course, all my slides get scanned and entered in my Aperture library, just like my digital pictures, but in most cases, these slide pictures don't get any "touch-up" in the softwarem contrary to most of my digital raws.
    Oh well, I may be an old traditionalist, but I just love the way these slides look.
     
  47. Color and dare I say, sharpness of a well taken transparency is to my eye still unmatchable in digital, even as good as digital is, even though I shoot digital all the time. I still shoot film including slide film.
     
  48. I shoot slides and scan selected images because I've grown tired of the way digital requires us to acquire computer storage resources -- additional hard drives, mirroring, Raid 5 or 10 or whatever.
    A couple of years ago, I bought two back-up drives because my internal had way too many images on it. After another year of shooting with my Nikon D200, I found my hard drive cluttered and my back-up drives were filling up. At some point, the decreased cost per image became a file management nightmare for me. Sure, I could delete unwanted pictures, but that is just more maintenance that I do not want to manage. File deletion is also contrary to what I learned from photojournalism classes about discarding images.
    The storage hassle refreshed my memory about the great auto archival feature of silver and dye-based photography. Oddly enough, I've never heard of file cabinet failure, but I know from my experience as a database administrator electronic storage sometimes lets us down.
    When I went to the Great Smokes National Park in October 2009, I shot Velvia with my Nikon F5, whose ergonomics, especially when it came to mirror lock-up functionality, made me not want to touch the D200 anymore for anything except candids.
    If I was a working press photographer, I would love digital at deadline because of the speed with which I could move my images to the photo desk. However, because I am just another weekend photographer, I've decided to defer the need for immediate gratification.
     
  49. Yes but even then I do tend to save at the largest file size and quality I can even with my scanned images... thing is I only shoot 36 or so at a time so it is not as bad as just fireing off a 4GB card and hopeing for the best.
     
  50. mostly because of Kodachrome. colors look amazing - http://mooostudios.com/americana/americana.htm
     
  51. I shoot both 35mm and medium format E6. When I lived in Pittsburgh, I sent my film to Praus Productions in Rochester, NY. They were reasonably priced, had quick turn around, and did a superb job at processing and handling the film. I recently moved to the Texas Hill Country and use Holland Photo in Austin. They also do superb work and are very quick. They have a mailing system using small self-addressed cardboard boxes for film. It works well. When traveling requires the use of mailers, I'll use Dale Labs in Florida. I can recommend these labs with confidence.
    My favorite part of photography is projecting slides, especially medium format.
    Jerry
     
  52. Dale labs is pretty good and I think they still will process bulk loaded Movie films....
     
  53. Well,
    [​IMG]
    Any Questions??
     
  54. Yes And your point is?
    [​IMG]
     
  55. I still shoot slides because I love to project them. In my opinion, nothing tops projection. Colors are so vibrant, images are very sharp and no post processing is needed. And then there are the film cameras themselves, which I still really enjoy using.
    I also use a digital SLR, but the majority of time I treat it like my 'funcam'. There have been a couple of occasions when I have taken it as a serious method of image capture. But when I like to get serious about my photography, I almost always use slide film.
    Regards, Steve.
     
  56. I too use digital a lot, but when I'm serious about color, it's Velvia all the way. I just haven't seen anything that matches it for color saturation and definition. I miss K200 too -- nothing else pulls life out of drab winter scenes like it.
     
  57. Oops! Forgot to say that there is also the lasting power of slides. The attached scan is an extremely accurate rendition of the original slide which I took on Ektachrome X 40 years ago and scanned a few months ago.
     
  58. Soory folks. Hopefully I got it right this time.
    00VmbF-221031684.jpg
     
  59. whowould want a plainold JPEG file when you could have the glory of a projected Velvia slide or the beaty of a 645 on a light table?
     
  60. I continue to shoot stereo (3D) slides with vintage 1950s cameras. IMO, no digital 3D display has yet matched the impact of these slides as seen with a good viewer. The "you are there" feeling is overwhelming, impressing even every pro photographer who sees them. Mostly I've been using Kodachrome, but have been drifting toward Astia as the end of K-chrome approaches.
    Even projecting them (with polarizing glasses like at the movies) has a profound effect. Though great results can be accomplished digitally these days, there's nothing like the basic simplicity and purity of a projected transparency. I'll be shooting slides as long as possible.
     
  61. Until I got a D3x, Kodachrome 64, scanned on a Nikon cs9000, offered the best image I could get from a 35mm camera. I'm now completely out of K64, but Ektar 100 has reignited my interest in film. I think I'll still miss K64 though:
    00Vp2I-222443584.jpg
     
  62. Like Hillary's post, I frequently use a Kodak Stereo camera.
    I can't afford to switch to digital now. Eventually my stereo shots will be scanned to digital for use with the promised new HD 3D monitors. Also, I use slide film in my Minolta occasionally when I know there will be enough of a single subject for projection.
     
  63. no offence
    but you will have a lot of trouble in getting a sterio image to work with a new 3d monitor as you will have to mess about with complex stuff such as polarisation seperation and the like
    i would stick with a viewer anyways
     
  64. I am from China and through one of the largest forum I found this thread. I used to have several digital small cameras (such as LX-3, Canon A70, Canon Pro-1 and so on) and DSLRs (such as Nikon D80). I have to admit that the digital cameras are very convenient, especially for us who do not have enough time in going to the photo shops. However recently I picked up one Chinese made very old SLR. It is primitive compare to modern cameras, but I enjoyed so much. Now I have found that more and more China's 80s and 90s had already left digital cameras aside and bought second hand cameras, such as M3, M6, Mamiya, Phenix series, Seagull DF, Agfa super Sillette, Contax T2, etc etc.... By using these cameras they've created magnificent and although may not be perfect but unique photos that modern light-medium DSLR could not compare. Moreover, the price of shooting with slides and old SLR is still cheaper compare to the body of such as 5D Mark II and lenses such as Nikkor 24-70/2.8G...But the effect is the same or even better.

    Thank you all guys for reading my craps and enjoy your life with your most handy camera (which's the essence of the photography :) )

    Seagull DF-2000A + 24-70mm/3.5-4.5 + Fuji Superia 200 + Fuji Frontier 570
    [​IMG]
     
  65. John Shen
    Are there any Slide films still made in China? I love the B&W film from China. It has a very unique look.
     
  66. My film cameras came with a "normal" perspective lens, none slower than f/1.8, that produce very sharp slides; digital cameras come with a heavy zoom, none faster than f/3.5, that produce images of so-so sharpness. Several big-name digital camera manufacturers still don't even make a fast normal prime lens, and those that do want as many dollars for the lens as they do for the body AND the kit zoom. Does that make sense?
    My film cameras were manufactured out of metal about 20 years ago, and are still reliable today (true, they have had some maintenance over the years) - how many of the digital cameras sold today will still be working 20 years from now?
    I can't justify retiring my perfectly serviceable Japanese metal and glass, and going into debt for Chinese plastic that won't take any better pictures than what I'm getting now - with equipment that was paid for long ago.
    So for a non-professional who has limited funds to spend on my hobby, shooting slides is mostly a matter of economics, but also of esthetics. I enjoy the fine materials, craftsmanship and elegance of a classic manual camera, as well as the simplicity of operation. By searching out used equipment, I was able to put together a kit of two bodies, 3 primes, and a zoom (all Pentax) for less than what a good digital body would cost today.
    And when I want to see my stuff projected at 50"x50" my old Kodak Carousel still makes pretty - have you seen the prices of digital projectors? I can buy a lot of chrome film and E6 processing for what it would cost me to "upgrade" to digital. With my film scanner and Photoshop I can fool around with digital post-processing, while still enjoying my classic cameras in the field.
     
  67. RE Larry Dressler:
    The answer is: YES!
    There are still two major film makers, naming: Lucky and Gongyuan (Era). Lucky is much bigger, while in my personal opinion Gongyuan's B&W (and the only product of it) is more beautiful (they imported Fuji technique in 1980s and mixed with domestic techniques)
    Lucky films (colour):
    [​IMG]
    B&W:
    [​IMG]
    Gongyuan (Era) films
    [​IMG]
    Price is still very cheap: $1 - $1.2 per roll.
    Unfortunately, even Kodak and Fuji film cannot fight against the digitalization of all photography industry from kids camera toys to professional top-end makers such as Nikon and even Leica. For this reason, the two Chinese big film makers have stepped near an edge of bankruptcy only because government wants to save it could it survive. It is a "lucky" for all Chinese though, that we still have our "own" film industry which is very important.
    Fujifilm also has a redistribution centre in South West China who is dedicated to produce Superia 100 and 200 film, but we also could see films from Vietnam recently.
    Generally speaking all kinds of films are much hard to find. In medium cities there are hardly any shops who are selling them, and to print them out in a fine quality level is also proved very hard. Ppls have to use ebay (or ebay's powerful Chinese competitor whose name is Taobao) to purchase from Shanghai or Beijing bigger shop, and mail them back for a developing, and then waiting for another mailing back of one scanned DVD plus slides. Cheaper way would be purchasing a no-cheap film-scanner and scan by himself after developing (such as me)
    Though, there are still a few very famous shops in Shanghai who has proved themselves very successful when whole film industry is dying. Name: Shanghai Elite, Shanghai Green, Beijing Xiangshenghang. etc. I've seen so many foreigners who brought their lomo cameras into these shops.
    Once again, as a courtesy to all friends and masters of films here, A film-photo is presented below (A salute when we post or reply one thread in Chinese photography forum)
    (Vanta G-5 + Luxitar 28-70mm/f3.5-4.5 + Lucky 100 + CanoScan 8800F)
    An old carpenter is hired for a major renovation of ancient Huishan town in Wuxi city before applying for Unisco World Heritage
    [​IMG]
     
  68. Dear Gary Wright ,
    I agree with most of your words, except for this:
    I can't justify retiring my perfectly serviceable Japanese metal and glass, and going into debt for Chinese plastic that won't take any better pictures than what I'm getting now - with equipment that was paid for long ago.
    It is Nikon or Canon who has invested into China (also Vietnam and Indonesia) and built up digital camera / lens lines, not Chinese camera makers. Chinese lens makers (such as Phenix) used to manufacture fine lens which can be comparable against (some type of) Karl Zeiss lens, but were crushed by Japanese giants in 1980s because of its relatively small scale. Remember, it is Japanese giants who brought these cheap plastic into China then pushed all over the world, not Chinese.
    The Chinese all know Kodak, Leica or Zeiss history, so please read some history of China film industry before you post any words like above. No offence.
    Photo: Japanese-USA hot baby Leah Dizon used a Chinese made Seagull Twin-lens reflex in Africa
    [​IMG]
     
  69. John Shen,
    No offense intended, and none taken.
    It was not my intention, John, to criticize China or the Chinese people in any way. I'm sure we Americans are equally responsible for substandard products - wherever they are manufactured - by demanding ever cheaper prices. We are too willing to ignore some ugly truths about pollution and exploitation in order to get our daily fix of cheap stuff, and that makes me sad.
    The point I thought I was trying to make is not so much that the Chinese (and Vietnamese and Indonesian) cameras are bad, but that my 1980s era Japanese cameras are good - and, more importantly, paid for. And because they were paid for in 1980s dollars, they look like a bargain compared to the new plastic cameras I see in the stores today.
    Because I became a photographer during the 1970s, the weight and feel of satin aluminum and blackened brass have a way of pushing my nostalgia buttons in a way that plastic does not. When I was coming of age "Plastics" was a joke punch line in a movie (The Graduate).
    I admit it - nostalgia makes no sense - the esthetics of the camera exterior has no effect on the esthetics of the image - and it's all about the image, right?
    But when I add up esthetics, and economics, and image quality - the scales tip in favor of film - at least it does, for me, for now.
    I think you must know what I am talking about, or you wouldn't be showing me a picture of a Seagull Twin-lens reflex - unless you are really showing me a picture of a hot babe - in which case we are still talking about esthetics, right?
     
  70. James G. Dainis

    James G. Dainis Moderator

    Sigh. Oh for the good old days when one could tell a "real" photographer by the amount of brassing showing on the corners and edges of his camera.
     
  71. Or the amount of Electrical tape on the camera also.... :)
     
  72. Dear Gary,
    I think the divergence came from the unintentional ignored carelessness that might indicate and intimate the link between perfectly serviceable metal and glass with Japan, and plastic won't work with China. It is not fair. That is why I wanted to contest, gave proofs, and tried to correct. For other parts I am on your side.
    Sincerely
     
  73. Sorry about the late post but I came across some slides my dad shot around 1952 either coming or going to Japan - then Korea (war).
    Kodakrome colors held up despite terrible storage.
    00WPio-242385584.jpg
     

Share This Page