Your last hurrah for film.

[rogerwb]

<p>When you are done with your last hurrah, you wil have no need for the Bessa, so you can send it to me.</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>I don't even ponder not shooting film, or even worrying about it, but if Daniel is shooting MF, maybe the end IS near<g>.</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>An incidental comment here, but Silverprint of London, the photographic specialists, have reported increased sales of b+w film over the last twelve months.</p>

[stephen_hipperson]

<p>The last film I take will be buried with me - then no one will ever know whether I got it right at last.</p>

[billangel]

<p>"The last film I take will be buried with me - then no one will ever know whether I got it right at last."<br>

It's not a bad idea to be buried with your camera and film. The Egyptians would bury their dead with their favorite possessions, so that they would have their possessions with them in the afterlife.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Not the time to panic, at least as far as film is concerned. Photo Techniques magazine this month (or last month) mentioned that there are more films being made today than in 1990, prior to the strong showing of digital cameras and PT is presently a primarily digital photography journal.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>With my last roll of film, I would...<br>

...set up a digital camera to photograph whatever I usually photograph.</p>

<p>Then I'd use the film camera to photograph the LCD panel, or through the viewfinder, of the digital camera.</p>

<p>Then I'd develop the negatives, have them scanned and have a lab make gelatin silver prints from the scans.</p>

<p>Then I'd form all the prints into Möbius strips.</p>

<p>And then I'd know the answer to the Eternal Question.</p>

[bruce_erickson1]

<p>Lex: The answer is 42. No need to go to all that trouble.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>And it could be forty, too.</p>

[jens_g.r._benthien]

<p>The last frame I've shot was an interior shot of a luxurious private estate - and I've just sent it to the E6 lab.</p>

<p>I really have no idea when, where, why and how I will expose my last roll or sheet of film. </p>

<p>Currently I am starting to sell all my 35 mm and 6x9 equipment, because I want to 'upgrade' to 5"x7" or 4"x5", depending on the money I'll get for my equipment. You might notice that I even don't have to mention that these are film based cameras - everybody knows that these <strong><em>must</em></strong> be film base cameras. Funny, isn't it?</p>

<p>I am following the comments about 'Last roll of film', 'Film is dead', 'Film is history' etc. for more than a decade now, but because I've never experienced any shortage of the medium I am going to continue with what I've always done: Photography. Which - at least in my case - means film, because film is photography and photography is film.</p>

 

[john_bellenis]

<p>I shot my last roll of film (120 Velvia 100) sometime in 2007. At the time I didn't realize it would be my last roll, I was shooting my jobs on film, side by side with digital, before I made the switch and I finally realized that the film back up had become redundant. I packed up my film cameras - Sinar P 4x5, Fuji GX 680, Mamiya 67 Pro II (3 Bodies) and Nikon 35mm (4 bodies) and never gave it a second thought after that. I have subsequently sold all my film cameras without any regret or even nostalgia.</p>

<p>I had a love affair with film that began when I was 10 - shooting with a Zenit E camera and processing and printing my own black and white film. I loved every aspect of photography from the shooting through to mounting and matting prints. The first 20+ years of my professional career were 100% film (obviously) - mainly transparency, but with some black and white and color neg in the mix. I owned a professional lab and was shooting all formats from 8x10 to 35mm. I felt like I had a deep grounding and love of film photography, knowing numerous film types and their characteristics, filtration, processing options, etc. and I knew exactly how to get the results I wanted in any bizarre situation.</p>

<p>I was initially dismissive and suspicious of digital photography and was definitely a late adopter in the advertising photography world. I was still scanning my transparencies on a Flextight scanner long after most of my peers were shooting 100% digital. I knew I had to make the switch when art directors voiced their frustration with looking at Polaroid previews as opposed to full screen, zoomable images on a laptop. Once I made the switch I never looked back.</p>

<p>Things that took forever with film are mere clicks away with digital, I enjoy working in Photoshop much more than in the darkroom and the advantages of tethered shooting and full screen images are enormous - no more waiting for Polaroids to develop and peering at tiny previews. I love not dealing with making dupes, filing and archiving jobs in rows of file cabinets and the occasional, but inevitable lab errors. How many fashion and beauty photographers have had the perfect expression captured on a Polaroid and then fought for ages trying to reproduce it on film? That's just not a problem anymore - all the first test shots are the same resolution as the "real shots"! Shooting RAW allows me much more latitude with white balance and combining multiple processed versions - no more gelling windows and lights - leaving me more time to concentrate on more creative aspects of the shoot.</p>

<p>Basically I look back on film like an old girlfriend, we had some wonderful times, I have great memories and we knew each other well. Time has moved on though and the new girl is better looking, much easier going, less expensive, more flexible and a lot easier to travel with.</p>

[gabor_szabo3]

<p>When film is no longer made, there's always ambro/ferrotype. Just sayin'.</p>

[alan_zinn]

<p>Jens, Gabor,<br>

Real hunters eat what they kill. REAL photographers shoot with home-made cameras and film.</p>

[billangel]

<blockquote>

<p>REAL photographers shoot with home-made cameras and film.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not a bad idea. In fact, I've seen information on the web about "handmade silver bromide emulsion"</p>

[andrew_gardiner]

<p>I don't see the point of setting oneself artificial limits. I've been wondering recently if I've taken my last ever serious digital photograph, but its probably just a phase.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Tried a blue filter on my MF film camera this afternoon (with Ilford Delta 100 B&W film), while shooting snow patterns (caused by wind) under a blue sky in late afternoon, to try to keep the bluish shadows from going too dark under those contrasty light conditions . Not sure how they will turn out, but after I go in to my lab and process the film, today, or tomorrow, or Monday (the anticipation will be the same), perhaps the last part of the process will indeed be a small hurrah, or maybe I will have to return and shoot using a different color filter. Who knows? There seems never to be an end to that fun, although the subject matter and the needs may change. </p>

[derek_kennedy]

<p>Well Arthur: I had a blast today so I hope that last hurrah never gets here!</p>

<p>Ran a roll of Pan F+ thru my Pentax 645 today, and developed it in <em>Coffenol</em>. This was my first attempt at developing film in coffenol and it was like my very first roll I ever developed myself - lots of different feelings: excitement, apprehension, wonder - then awe! It actually worked!</p>

<p>The roll is hanging to dry at the moment but so far im pretty excited! The negs look great so far!</p>

<p>The fun <em>never</em> ends!</p>

<p>Im <em>not</em> ready for the last hurrah just yet.</p>

[jaydesi]

<p>I'm not yet 40, have a couple more years until that milestone. I expect that film will outlast me, even if it's just a specialty product. But I can't say for sure that I'll still be shooting film. I enjoy both film and digital now, for different reasons, but I have no idea what may change over the next several decades. I suspect, though, that if I'm not shooting film until the end, my last roll of film will be a whimper...something that sat and sat because I no longer had any interest in using it.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Wow, Derek, table salt, instant coffee and soda water? No problem therefore if the chemical/photography companies cease making black and white film developers, the needed B&W film developing ingredients are in the kitchen! I had heard about this some time ago, but hadn't realised so many photographers like you were using caffenol in different component mix formulas, as well as conventional developers. Cool!</p>

[derek_kennedy]

<p>No salt - just washing soda, vitamin c and instant coffee. Cant wait to scan those negs!</p>

<p>Apparently instead of salt one could use potassium bromide. You use much less than the salt and the negs look much better. Havent tried a recipe with the potassium bromide yet though.</p>

<p>Yeah i've been wanting to try it out for a while but it was hard getting 2 of those ingredients. Only one store had the washing soda but i was still surprised i could find it at all here, but the powdered vitamin c i had to order in off the net.</p>

<p>Ive seen some incredible photos on another site that were developed in coffenol and I was impressed at how well they looked.</p>

[adam_n]

<p>Well, I guess I am the ultimate anachronism!<br>

<br /> I recently bought a 4x5 film field camera, and after stocking up on expired Quickloads & Readyloads, am ready for some fun! I am so tired of the digital look... Whatever happened to taking your time to compose, editing in the camera & the whole art Zen experience?<br>

<br /> I am comfortable with a DSLR technology, but I miss the old days/ ways. I am not a professional photographer, but if digital backs come down from the stratosphere in price, and they actually cover the 4x5 GG, then maybe I will investigate converting. But until then, I am going to be different & have fun!<br>

<br /> All the best.<br /><br /> <strong>~An analog man in a digital world.</strong></p>

[derek_kennedy]

<p>I just purchased two lenses for my 645, ordered up a whack of film, and some developer.</p>

<p>Im not ready.</p>

<p>But i think i mentioned already that im not ready.</p>

[jens_g.r._benthien]

<blockquote>

<p> I knew I had to make the switch when art directors voiced their frustration with looking at Polaroid previews as opposed to full screen, zoomable images on a laptop.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Looks like you have relegated / degraded yourself into being a simple operator of a technical device...</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>a simple operator of a technical device...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Which is what a lot of photographers are even if they don't want to admit it.</p>

[john_bellenis]

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>Looks like you have relegated / degraded yourself into being a simple operator of a technical device...</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

<p>I'm intrigued to know how you come to this conclusion. Both film and digital are merely capture mediums - nothing more. Both rely on "technical devices". One cannot be inherently more creative than the other - that has to come from the photographer.</p>

<p>The decision to shoot film or digital has nothing whatsoever to do with creativity, vision, composition, timing, impact, styling, model direction, etc. or any of the skills that ad agencies hire photographers for. Please explain why you believe that choosing a medium that has better image previews than another (among a myriad of other advantages) in any way "relegates or degrades" someone to being a simple operator of a technical device? A Polaroid back is also just a technical device - albeit a much less useful, time consuming and less effective one. </p>

<p>You are putting far too much importance on equipment (technical devices) which is merely there to enable a photographer to realize his vision. You can't buy creativity at a camera store or in a pack of film. Does the fact that you are using a computer now instead of a quill pen in any way alter your writing skills and abilities?</p>

<p>Professional photography is about images, results, creativity and vision. If you believe that the choice of the best equipment to realize that can in some way degrade you, you are entirely missing the point.</p>