Who developes your film?

[c_watson1]

"Well, you don't have to print them all."

 

But minilabs did for years, charging a flat rate for dev/print service most people opted for on 35mm 24/36 C-41 service.

[q.g._de_bakker]

The Zeiss 80mm planar purchased with my Hasselblad 500c in 1972 is still a top quality lens. My best lens is a Zeiss Otus 85mm f1.4 in Nikon F mount. Its image quality shows up in both film and digital.

I use both film and digital and find each has advantages depending on the circumstances. I also visualize differently when I am shooting film v. digital. One of the best things I learned from Ansel Adam's books is visualization before I take the image.

A propos Zeiss:

Yes, modern lenses can be and often are far better than the ones they made half a century ago. Mainly due to the more complex designs raw computer power not available back then allows (just compare the cross section of that 'Planar' type 85 mm Otus to that of the Hasselblad 80 mm Planar. Plus apsherical surfaces, anomalous partial dispersion, floating elements. Too many parameters to play with unless you have powerful computers).

 

But as Zeiss (there they are) at one time long ago pointed out: they could make extremely good lenses too back then (and they did a few), but getting to see the difference would require more in terms of photographic technique than could be expected from most photographers.

Carefull focussing, for instance. Nowadays that is left to a computer. The trend is to favour it being done fast rather than deliberate and precise.

Not using small apertures is another thing. Even today "f/11 and be there", stopping down as far as shutterspeeds allow, is still very common. You need the DoF, right? DoF is unsharpness as evenly distributed as possible. In a perfect lens, stopping down from wide open to one stop slower already limits the lens quite considerably. Good thing not all lenses are perfect. :)

Shutterspeeds... always use a good tripod? Not many tripods around. Image stabilisation substitutes for that. It works, a bit. But people see it as a way to be able to use even longer shutterspeeds handheld.

So even with the much better lenses today, i think it would be fair to say that most photographers do not get to see that their lenses are better than those from half a century ago.

[glen_h]

"Well, you don't have to print them all."

 

But minilabs did for years, charging a flat rate for dev/print service most people opted for on 35mm 24/36 C-41 service.

 

When I was young, my dad explained the reason he used slide film.

It is much cheaper than print film and printing all the images.

 

But yes, for many years the develop and print all, maybe even double print, was less

than the cost of develop only, and print a small selection of prints. For minilabs,

it is much less labor, which is a big part of the cost.

 

I mostly used Qualex in those days.

 

In the days before minilabs, prints were more expensive, and the advantage

not so big. Maybe 50 or 40 years ago.

[rodeo_joe1]

Older ( just 15 yoear old digitale camera-s are "outdatedïn different ways, the software used ( windows 7) the operating systems used ( also windows 7) the sensors used canno longer be replaced the edited nef files ( more current ones use a "sidecar" the edits) become problematic with current post software, etc.

Yeah, yeah yeah.

And where can you get Kodachrome processed these days? Or E4 film? Or C22 film? Where can you buy a 126 instamatic cartridge? Buy 620 film? Buy film for a Polaroid Swinger? Or readily buy 1/4 plate sized cut film? Where are the spare parts and accessories for a Contarex, Praktina or Exacta?

Obsolescence has been a business model for at least the last 5 decades if you hadn't noticed.

 

There's absolutely nothing to stop anyone from using a 20 year old digital camera. I'm still running Windows 7 on my workstation computers, and they'll equally easily read the files from my Sony A7rIV and my old Canon 5D mk1, should I fancy using it.

Edited June 24, 2022 by rodeo_joe|1

[CvhKaar]

I can buy all the film i need for both 36mm and medium format, and have it processed at the same place, or process it myself, no problem there.. :

 

Kamera Express (kamera-express.nl)

 

Kamera Express (kamera-express.nl)

 

Now try to install windows 7 on PC with a current processor, (Windows 7 is only supported until Intel 6th generation processor, The 7th Generation Intel® Core™ Processors do not support Windows 7* or Windows 8.1*.) and 9 out of 10 it will say it does not recognize the CPU and fail to install, so when that windows 7 PC ( workstation is a Unix term ) chances are that it will be the end of that.

 

Optical disks ( CD-rom , Blue-ray)are also starting to be phased out, and the plastic used deteriorates after 10-15 years under influence of UV light , magnetic media ( older harddisks) lose charge after 20 years ( if you find a way to connect them to a current PC ( no more ISA-slots / IDE- connectors etc.)

[rodeo_joe1]

Now try to install windows 7 on PC with a current processor, (Windows 7 is only supported until Intel 6th generation processor, The 7th Generation Intel® Core™ Processors do not support Windows 7* or Windows 8.1*.) and 9 out of 10 it will say it does not recognize the CPU and fail to install, so when that windows 7 PC ( workstation is a Unix term ) chances are that it will be the end of that.

 

Optical disks ( CD-rom , Blue-ray)are also starting to be phased out, and the plastic used deteriorates after 10-15 years under influence of UV light , magnetic media ( older harddisks) lose charge after 20 years ( if you find a way to connect them to a current PC ( no more ISA-slots / IDE- connectors etc.)

None of which are insurmountable issues. It's only similar to trying to find an enlarger that takes whole plate negatives... except probably much easier, and cheaper, to solve than that. Digital data can easily be losslessly transferred from one medium to another. Not so easy with direct image transfer to a more compact and less fragile format.

 

The point is that obsolescence is a fact of life. As is that we live in an increasingly digitally-connected world. Get used to it. It's not going to go away!

[BeBu Lamar]

I can buy all the film i need for both 36mm and medium format, and have it processed at the same place, or process it myself, no problem there.. :

 

Kamera Express (kamera-express.nl)

 

Kamera Express (kamera-express.nl)

 

Now try to install windows 7 on PC with a current processor, (Windows 7 is only supported until Intel 6th generation processor, The 7th Generation Intel® Core™ Processors do not support Windows 7* or Windows 8.1*.) and 9 out of 10 it will say it does not recognize the CPU and fail to install, so when that windows 7 PC ( workstation is a Unix term ) chances are that it will be the end of that.

 

Optical disks ( CD-rom , Blue-ray)are also starting to be phased out, and the plastic used deteriorates after 10-15 years under influence of UV light , magnetic media ( older harddisks) lose charge after 20 years ( if you find a way to connect them to a current PC ( no more ISA-slots / IDE- connectors etc.)

 

What are the prices in?

[mike_halliwell]

What are the prices in?

Euros....:D

[mike_halliwell]

35mm (C41) dev and print to 6 x 4 usually ~ £9

[BeBu Lamar]

Euros....:D

 

If in Euro I think I have problem buying all the film I need as I don't have that much income.

[Ken Katz]

"35mm (C41) dev and print to 6 x 4 usually ~ £9"

 

For 36 prints (even 24) that is quite inexpensive today. Scratching my head at the "6x4" description. Isn't the UK metric or are you just being kind to us North Americans on PN?

[BeBu Lamar]

"35mm (C41) dev and print to 6 x 4 usually ~ £9"

 

For 36 prints (even 24) that is quite inexpensive today. Scratching my head at the "6x4" description. Isn't the UK metric or are you just being kind to us North Americans on PN?

I think it would make more sense that the prints are 150x100 but then perhaps the printers are make to print 4" long roll??

[q.g._de_bakker]

If in Euro I think I have problem buying all the film I need as I don't have that much income.

So change that to "you can buy all the film you can afford".

[BeBu Lamar]

So change that to "you can buy all the film you can afford".

Be honest with my reduced income and the cost of living going up I don't think I can afford using film.

[eddy_d]

In Digital the camera does the work for you. In film you have to set the camera up to do what you want because there is no photoshop or computer installed. And you are going to color correct and photoshop 100s of bad photos? As the saying goes you can't polish a turd so why bother. And if you are hired for a job I don't think the person that hired you is going to appreciate you spraying and praying. That has been looked down upon for a long time. No professional photographer would do that . And cameras coming out now the technology is obsolete because something better comes out the next time a new camera comes out with better bells and whistles. Now you have mirrorless cameras that are going to put mirrored cameras out of businesss because it will eventually be all mirrorless. And without film you would not have digital cameras or photosop. Cell phones are putting digital cameras almost out of business. The censors are better and the instagram generation doesn't want a regular digital camera. The phone is just as good. They are making movies with I phones. As someone told me what they're digital photography teacher told them. Take photos as if you just had a roll of 36 exposure film and when it comes to photoshop less is more.

[mike_halliwell]

And you are going to color correct and photoshop 100s of bad photos?

Most people have absolutely no idea what the machines in highstreet photo-processors actually do to your colour print film when printing. They switch to digital and start to produce crap... I wonder why?

 

They also wonder why if you get re-prints done they don't match the first set....:confused:

 

As I said somewhere above, colour transparency is the least adjustable format i've ever used!

Edited June 28, 2022 by mike_halliwell

[eddy_d]

I was talking about doing the post work yourself not taking it to a lab and have them do it.And you need to have your film developed in a wet machine that is still using chemicals. Even digital files printed on a wet machine supposedly look better. I never had problems with reprints not looking the same. There was a lab I used to go to that could put your digital files on a blank roll of film and then develop the film. They didn't look bad at all.

[mike_halliwell]

put your digital files on a blank roll of film and then develop the film. They didn't look bad at all.

That's crazy!