robert_ante Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 The very charm and excitement working with film is NOT having a preview (other than in one’s mind’s eye) until the development process is complete. Digital is ok for those who enjoy sitting in front of a computer. Of course, for professional trade work, digital is an absolute necessity. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin O Posted May 2, 2022 Author Share Posted May 2, 2022 The very charm and excitement working with film is NOT having a preview (other than in one’s mind’s eye) until the development process is complete. Well, this is where I disagree, and where my original post really came from. I very much enjoy shooting film, and the results I get. My favourite camera these days is a Rolleiflex 3.5F, and I've come to enjoy taking indoor, window-lit portraits - very often with strong back- or side-lighting. Now, actually, I am generally quite happy with my results. (I almost always shoot Portra 400.) But sometimes I am unsure about the balance of foreground and background, and a preview of how an exposure might turn out would be nice. It's no different to how photographers used to shoot polaroids before committing to the actual shot. A desire for some assistance in visualising exposure isn't some kind of betrayal of film photography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 Essentially, none of these early cameras (nor the ones suggested by JDM) were suitable. "Natural" selection proved you right. But they were still amazing for so early in the curve. Before the pandemic, I was more than halfway through a report on them, but the problems you discuss, make them difficult in today;s world. Maybe someday... Some of the impedimenta of the Kodak DCS 560 getting batteries that work is not the least of problems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJG Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 Hi, yeah, I would say that 6 MP was enough for general purpose studio portraits. For years we sorta saw that as the holy grail of digital - the point at which we (the portrait chain) could actually make the jump from film to full digital. For us, a high-quality 8x10 inch color print was the minimum requirement, and a 6 MP camera could do this. You (JDM) are probably not familiar, but our headquarters was practically in your backyard (I know from posts where you're from). We were a bit north of you, city across the river. If you know any of the photo professors from your local university, they'd be familiar (back then we always had summer interns from their photography degree programs). Anyway, it was a substantially large operation, and we probably saw near every viable camera option. To help make this point I sat in on presentations from Phase One, Megavision, and even Foveon with a proposed studio camera. As a large user of Kodak, Konica, and Fuji paper they made sure we had the opportunity to look at any cameras in their bailiwick. I mostly did the initial screening. Essentially, none of these early cameras (nor the ones suggested by JDM) were suitable. For our purposes. The EOS DCS 1 had enough resolution, at 6 megapixels, but... wanna see your images? Download to a your computer vis SCSI, then use an image processing program to view. Whatayoudo if someone blinked? Usher the family back into the camera room? I guess you could. The digital backs had enough resolution, and could tether. But... no blur filter so moire out the wazoo. Unless you knew specifically how to avoid it for specific fabrics, etc. And if you can't keep your sensor protected from dust, well... everybody knows what happens. This sort of stuff is sorta OK if you do low volume hi-price work and can afford the retouch time. But for mass market portrait work, with appointments booked all day... no good. These are the things that initially kept early digital out of "busy" portrait studios, not the high cost of the camera. I still remember my first DSLR that allowed 5 raw files before it stopped to write the images to the card for about 45 seconds and then allowed another 5 images, etc. Let's not even talk about transferring images to a computer and how long that took. It certainly was not the ultimate portrait camera... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Seaman Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 a preview of how an exposure might turn out would be nice I've followed this thread without comment, as I could not help thinking to myself, what on earth is wrong with the preview which is visible on the SLR / TLR screen? I've always found this view to be attractive and helpful to use, surely it's the main reason for reflex viewing in the first place. Yes, it would be nice to have a preview on something like a rangefinder with a poky finder, but on a reflex camera? You already have one surely. I've got a 3.5F and find the reflex view bright and a pleasure to use, and more than adequate to make the composition and assess exposure in different areas. Until the subject starts moving that is ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Seaman Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 getting batteries that work is not the least of problems That's why I sold my small collection, including the F90X based Kodak NC2000e, which was lumbered by Kodak with a hard wired internal battery, impossible to replace. LINK --- --- https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/the-kodak-nc-2000e-a-prehistoric-dslr.5522407/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin O Posted May 2, 2022 Author Share Posted May 2, 2022 (edited) I've followed this thread without comment, as I could not help thinking to myself, what on earth is wrong with the preview which is visible on the SLR / TLR screen? I've always found this view to be attractive and helpful to use, surely it's the main reason for reflex viewing in the first place. Yes, it would be nice to have a preview on something like a rangefinder with a poky finder, but on a reflex camera? You already have one surely. I've got a 3.5F and find the reflex view bright and a pleasure to use, and more than adequate to make the composition and assess exposure in different areas. Until the subject starts moving that is ... Reflex viewing is perfect for previewing composition. It doesn't give you a preview of exposure. If you have your camera set to 1/500 @ f/22... does the screen look any different to when you have it set to 1 second @ f/3.5? That's what I mean. When I'm taking a portrait, back-lit or side-lit by a window, I often think... I wonder how dark/bright the subject's skin would appear, on both sides of their body, by changing my exposure settings. Or how washed-out the background might get, etc. There's a lot to be said for being able to preview this and not just leave it up to the magic of film photography. Edited May 2, 2022 by Colin O Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Seaman Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 (edited) I wonder how dark/bright the subject's skin would appear, on both sides of their body, by changing my exposure settings. That's understood and accepted Colin thanks. Hmm. Previewing using a cheap digital compact with a decent size rear screen would do it I suppose. Without perhaps betraying the purity of the film process. This was done with a Rolleiflex, with much post processing. Faffing around with a digital would have lost the moment, even if I had one back then. Edited May 2, 2022 by John Seaman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin O Posted May 2, 2022 Author Share Posted May 2, 2022 (edited) Tried it once - using digital for "preview" - and it basically worked. Slowed me down a lot though. Or maybe it was because the subject kept wanting to see every shot herself! Anyway, I'm not necessarily desperate to have the feature. My OP was just curious why no other brand tried what Contax/Kyocera tried, and if anyone had any experience actually using the Contax device. Edited May 2, 2022 by Colin O Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill C Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 My OP was just curious why no other brand tried what Contax/Kyocera tried, and if anyone had any experience actually using the Contax device. I would say your instincts about this are good. We used video cameras as viewfinder on our studio cameras for a looong time. The photographer used a remote "control handle" to raise/lower, pan, tilt, and zoom, then finally shoot, while they watched a TV monitor. This allowed relatively unskilled (with photo gear) to be hired... mainly they had to learn to work with people, and to pose, etc. This system evolved over the years. When we eventually went full digital we started out with eyepiece cameras, again with the photog viewing on a TV monitor. But obviously the quality is not good enough to focus with, etc. On the 2nd iteration of digital cams we finally went with photogs directly viewing with their own eye. Unexpected problem - studios calling tech support; previous shooter has adjusted eyepiece diopter for their vision. Now the new shooter can't see a clear image, and doesn't know about diopter adjustments, etc. Never-ending issues of running a business with employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c_watson1 Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 Tried it once - using digital for "preview" - and it basically worked. Slowed me down a lot though. Or maybe it was because the subject kept wanting to see every shot herself! Anyway, I'm not necessarily desperate to have the feature. My OP was just curious why no other brand tried what Contax/Kyocera tried, and if anyone had any experience actually using the Contax device. Buy a spot meter... Why not just accept that the Contax thingie was a dead end 20 years ago? Probably cheaper to get a decent digital p&s with a spot setting and a histogram display option. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Seaman Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 [ATTACH=full]1425509[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]1425509[/ATTACH] the subject kept wanting to see every shot herself! Hah! This is the Rolleiflex picture I should have uploaded. I don't think changing the exposure would have decreased the amount of post processing I had to do. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurencecochrane Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 [ATTACH=full]1425509[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]1425509[/ATTACH] Hah! This is the Rolleiflex picture I should have uploaded. I don't think changing the exposure would have decreased the amount of post processing I had to do. [ATTACH=full]1425511[/ATTACH] That should have been post processed directly to the recycle bin. WHERE DID YOU LEARN ABOUT LIGHTING ? Institute for the blind ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Seaman Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 That should have been post processed directly to the recycle bin. WHERE DID YOU LEARN ABOUT LIGHTING ? Institute for the blind ? To enable a more informed judgment, the story behind the shot is worth telling. The lady's husband was operating a model train set during an open day at the Shackerstone railway station on the preserved Battlefield Line some years ago. She sat with her patterns in a slightly scrappy area behind him, doing her knitting, lit by a shaft of sunlight from a window which also caught her hair. It was purely a grab shot with a 1939 Rolleiflex New Standard, with no opportunity to change the pose or the lighting - not that I would have wanted to change anything. The shot was posted to suggest how using a digicam or whatever to preview the exposure would result in losing the immediacy of the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurencecochrane Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 (edited) I sugest you learn photography basics first. Posting the likes of that shot on the internet only lets YOU down. To do the like again in low light with a film camera (where you cannot just up the ISO) first buy an angle bracket and a flash idealy one with a tilt head Edited May 3, 2022 by laurencecochrane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin O Posted May 3, 2022 Author Share Posted May 3, 2022 That should have been post processed directly to the recycle bin. WHERE DID YOU LEARN ABOUT LIGHTING ? Institute for the blind ? I'm actually kind of shocked. In what world is feedback like this acceptable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurencecochrane Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 P I'm actually kind of shocked. In what world is feedback like this acceptable? Get real. Posting REALLY BAD PHOTOGRAPHY on a photography forum. What kind of feedback do you really expect ? OH what a lovely photo ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin O Posted May 3, 2022 Author Share Posted May 3, 2022 P Get real. Posting REALLY BAD PHOTOGRAPHY on a photography forum. What kind of feedback do you really expect ? OH what a lovely photo ! I'm sorry but I was curious what kind of masterpieces you produce. Had a quick look at your posting history. Those last shots you posted in the Canon Thursday thread... absolutely pedestrian, not to mention suffering from motion blur. Worst of all, they don't tell any kind of story. I'd personally be ashamed to post those uninteresting snapshots. In fact, I wouldn't have bothered taking them in the first place. And then you come along here with a strange mix of immaturity and arrogance, and suggest...flash?? LOL John's photo tells a MUCH more interesting story than yours. Please remember to speak to people online exactly as you would face-to-face. Who do you think you are...Gordon Ramsay? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c_watson1 Posted May 4, 2022 Share Posted May 4, 2022 P Get real. Posting REALLY BAD PHOTOGRAPHY on a photography forum. What kind of feedback do you really expect ? OH what a lovely photo ! Drive-by jerk post. Don't drink and comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts