Antiquated Old Horse with M & Film?

[paul_chan4]

Most of us have probably been through this road before. You're out with a

group on a field excursion trip carrying your Ms and bricks of film. They

brandish the latest DSLRs, image bank storage device and laptops. When you're

all done for the day, they upload their images on CDs, clear their CF cards

and tinker with their latest software in the hotel rooms. And they do this

while giving you a cursory look on your 20-year old M, extolling the

convenience of RAWs and probably saying out loud in thier minds 'you're an old

antiquated old horse' with that museum hardware and film you tot around. So if

there's any one simple but courteous reply you have to speak out your mind,

what could that be? This is not a film v digital thread please.

[canfred]

Hi Paul , seems to me it is. State your point please. If you still own the antiquated Robot Royal, how about I take it of your hands. Te offer is $ 200.00

[sk_szekiat]

My reply would simply be, "slept well last night buddy?" I think if u really want, u can still find

1 hr labs littered all over the place and trust me, it takes more than an hr to process 36 raw

files so overall the film workflow is perhaps still slightly faster! Also, i find digital shooters

have an urge to wanna tweak photos just cos they can and this just takes up all their time. Be

glad u have time for other things in life. Btw, i'm not anti-digital. In fact, i use digital 80% of

the time. The leica is almost only for personal projects when i have an objective in mind. Its

too expensive to shoot random ppl on silver these days!

[norman_wijaya]

Hey szekiat, how is the Bessa R.

 

Leica vs the latest DSLR, just wait a few more months for the M8 then any discussion on film leica is just beating on old horse :)

[terry_rory]

You forgot the horse with the M6 AND the DSLR.

 

Flitting around with his B&W film loaded (or slide or whatever) taking some nice landscapes hopefully then wanting to go indoors and shoot in low light. Ah, I am halfway through an ISO 100 film and/or I dont have any ISO 400 or 800 on me and I dont want to waste half a film re-loading. Oh lordy me what a quandary. No, wait, I have a DSLR in the other compartment of my billingham. Rack it up to ISO 800 or 640 or whatever I need. Switch the white balance to whatever the indoor lighting is and.. "Bob's your mother's brother".

 

Happily back outside again and out with the Leica.

 

Other situation is... I have ISO 400 film loaded in the M6 and it is a really sunny day (in snow) and 1/1000th at f/16 just is not enough and I have no ISO 100 or ND filters! Drat. Oh, wait! I have a DSLR I can set it for this eventuality as well.

 

I really like having the best of both worlds.

[terry_rory]

And when I get home the DSLR RAW files are ready to go with "the latest software" and when I get my M6 negs/slides back, well they will also need "software" to be scanned on my Coolscan V. (It is a bit bl**dy useless without software I find!)

[terry_rory]

<p> Lets do photographs and stop worrying about the technology that others choose to use. </p>

 

<a href=" title="Trevor Hare 2006"><img src="http://static.flickr.com/51/160808163_0288ddf669_o.jpg" width="700" height="452" alt="West Lulworth (B3071)" /></a>

[rich815]

I wouldn't hang around with those who would be so childish or insecure as to say such things. Problem solved.

[terry_rory]

<p> I wanted to say that but did not want to be rude about Paul's friends. After a day's shooting you do not need to be with people who tinker with computers. You need to be enjoying a friendly pint or two... </p>

 

<a href=" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://static.flickr.com/77/161849864_da914fca4a_o.jpg" width="750" height="490" alt="Castle Inn." /></a>

[fjords]

Reply: Some prefer beer?<p><center><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/

hudson_hornet/151474506/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://static.flickr.com/

46/151474506_0519af9558_o.jpg" width="750" height="422" alt="moire" /></a></

center> Some a like soft drink!

[fjords]

After a good beverage, every thing seems clear<p><center><a href="http://

www.flickr.com/photos/hudson_hornet/162868077/" title="Photo Sharing"><img

src="http://static.flickr.com/44/162868077_58147c151a_o.jpg" width="700"

height="473" alt="on Beaver Creek I" /></a></center>

[wai_leong_lee]

"Silver is better"

[brambor]

All you need to do is to burst into their hotel room with a bottle of gin couple of models hanging around your neck (not airplane models)...

[john_graham3]

"So if there's any one simple but courteous reply you have to speak out your mind, what could that be?"

 

It would be "why not focus on photographic technique when you're on a workshop and put aside your paranoia over what you imagine other people are thinking about your gear." I'd say it to you, not the others who were using digital. I very much doubt they give a crap about what you are shooting with.

[al_kaplan1]

How about "This stuff was mostly bought second hand, was all paid for by about 1970, still works great, has been paying the bills all these years, and is now worth at least ten times what I paid for it"?

[runkel]

Other people usually aren't paying nearly as much attention to us as we imagine.

[john_graham3]

"and is now worth at least ten times what I paid for it"

 

Did you pay $0.10 on the dollar for it back then, or did you forget to adjust for inflation?

[dford]

<CENTER>

</CENTER>

If I felt that self conscience and uncomfortable in a workshop environment with other mature and respectful photographers, I would place my contax t3 back into my hello kitty back pack and amscray.

[al_kaplan1]

You're right about inflation, but a lot of it was good buys from panic struck folks trying to bail out from those old fashioned rangefinders because single lens reflexes were the wave of the future. Hell, both Modern Photography and Popular Photography magazines told us that, remember? Rangefinder cameras were old fashioned relics of another era. Other purchases were parts of complete kits where I sold off what I didn't want/need and ended up with what I wanted, either for next to nothing or even with a cash profit.

[john_graham3]

You don't think the Hello Kitty backpack itself would adequately distract those other busybodies from gossipng about your gear :*)

[john_graham3]

"single lens reflexes were the wave of the future. Hell, both Modern Photography and Popular Photography magazines told us that, remember? Rangefinder cameras were old fashioned relics of another era."

 

Modern Photography was before my time, Popular Photography is a waste of my time :*)

[christoph_hammann]

To the original question:

The perfect response in such a situation would be to go down to the bar for a beer and then

some night street photography into the evening. Much preferable to fiddling with your

pictures on a laptop.

Christoph

[Troll]

Trevor, what film for the pub shot, please (if it WAS film)?

[Troll]

Paul, you'd finished shooting -- why weren't you in the darkroom processing your film? And then after it dried you should have been up until 3 or 4 or 5 AM proofing it, or cutting and mounting it if you were shooting slides. If you weren't doing that, then your reply to them should have been, "Please show me how it's done."

[al_kaplan1]

You can also run the film through fresh rapid fix for three minutes, rinse it under the faucet for 30 seconds, dip it in Photoflow, squegee between your fingers, choose a frame by eyeballing the negatives, print from the wet negative and have an RC print on the editor's desk 5 minutes later. Then you finish fixing and properly washing the film.