DB_Gallery

Personally, after shooting digital for over 22 years, the darkroom is exactly where my career is going next. In 2012, I converted my small outside ski locker into a makeshift darkroom, I was able to make up to 16x20 using a unique tray stacker system that had a very interesting exhaust system. It was not plumbed and was a pain in many ways, especially keeping it warm on those cold winter nights at 8,000 feet. I also did 20x24's using a Jobo 3063 drum, a bit of a trial and error but it worked. So it allowed me to figure out or not if I really wanted to do this and if it would earn income through fine art prints. Well I am here to tell you in 2017 that not only do I want to do it, it does make me an encouraging income. So in January I spent a sizable amount on house that has some 500 square feet of basement space and I am currently building out a real darkroom. It will have two Saunders LPL 4550 XLG / VCCE enlargers, one wall mounted that will project onto a custom drop easel and then in the middle of those two will be a wall mounted and horizontally oriented Sinar P2 converted to a mural enlarger. The Sinar will have a custom built Heiland VC LED light source and that will allow me to do up to 50" x 70" prints which will be processed in a custom roller transport paper processor that I will build later this year. As it stands right now, I will be able to tray develop 20x24 so that ought to get the income flowing again. Also on the wet side will be a permanent place for my new Jobo CPP3 processor. Here is both the wet side and the dry side to date, note dark painted enlarger wall, wife installing baseboard:

I found the 810 to be a *very* good upgrade from the 800, really what the 800 should have been all along. For example, there is something about the NEF files from it that are hard to replicate with another body. The way the tones stay natural and yet vibrant when you work with them in post makes the 800 and the 750 look like a lesser camera by a good margin. This is something you can't get by doing some weekend review, you have to put thousands of frames into it over time, really push the equipment like it was designed to be pushed. As far as MP count goes, I get a ton of requests now for very high res imagery, so while 24MP on my Leica M240 and D750 do a good enough job for many things, the D810 and my Hasselblad CFV50c back take it to another level. I don't think anything about the D810 is out of date except for not having live view AF fine tune adjustments like the D5. I am going to wait to see what Nikon brings with the 900 but to be honest, I am shooting a lot more film now for work anyway so it might be something I pass on. Get the 810, it is a better camera than 90% of the people who use it anyway, it will last you awhile and be a phenomenal step up from the D700.

Some better shots of the blue carbon fiber while work in progress....

It's DONE, ready to make the journey across the Atlantic from Italy. Back in May of 2016, Alessandro Gibellini and I made a wishlist of all kinds of cool looks for this 4x5 camera. We took our time on this super custom version of his ACN45, worked through things like where in the heck to source blue carbon fiber, accepting a custom ground glass, etc. So now it is ready to go, even comes with a set of white bellows for when I am shooting long hours in bright sunlight using infrared film. I already have and use a very light Chamonix 45N2 which is fantastic but I found I needed a heavier camera for other kinds of shooting. So this ACN45 will weigh about 5.6 pounds, 2.3 pounds more than the Chamonix and will have an ultra bright Maxwell screen installed when I get it. I could have went with a Linhof or another camera but I wanted to support this young man's inspired efforts and dream up a heck of a beautiful camera that will be as much of a marketing magnet as a tool. Thanks for all your hard work Alessandro Gibellini, you are one of a kind in this world of photography and your cameras are a testament to that. For more info check out http://www.gibellinicamera.com

Those who say "I went digital in 20XX and never looked back" have no clue as to the new niche that film is now experiencing. It's a brilliant time to be a photographer, we can do both and more people now do.

Nah, having a digital along with film is one heck of a distraction for most. When using film, it is like playing guitar well, you don't have to look down at the fretboard, you just get into that rhythm and jam....you are good, you don't need to look. I don't know how the OP works with film but when I am using it the last thing on earth I want to have around is a digital anything.

I'd take the 50 1.8 and the 24-120 then, the speed and size difference is big. I have the 24-120, it is a real nice lens especially for the price, not terribly heavy, just the biggest 24mm or 120mm F4 you will ever use.

If he is serious about it, he will do like any true pro and find solutions, not excuses. For example, many of the wedding shooters I know who offer film as part of their product and service line use a good pro lab like Praus or Blue Moon Camera and Machine, the latter does beautiful optical prints from C41 negs. In the grand scheme of things on a high end wedding, film cost is truly miniscule. Could it be you probably had a rough time at using it so you bash it at any chance you get? I shoot both, just invested some $150,000 into a darkroom so I can continue to watch my income rise because of my expert use of it and mentoring young and talented photographers who love it as much as I do through workshops and artist in residencies. So at some point, you might want to calm and cleanse that inner voice by letting it go and accept that it is still a brilliant medium that will likely outlive all on this thread. Last May I did a magazine article on a famous marble quarry all on 120 and 4x5 B&W film, not one frame of digital. After film and expenses I made about $500 on the article. I did this because I saw the bigger picture in terms of unique access and fine art centric outcomes. Sure enough, some 10 months later I snagged a nice 5 digit sale for 8 murals from those images that are now in a lobby in a major metro area... Live and let live man...life is better that way.

I use and enjoy both equally albeit differently. When using film with the goal of printing in the darkroom, I feel 100% like I am engaging in photography in it's most accurate form. With digital I am producing digital "images" that can give the viewer the same emotional reaction as a darkroom print. Some 10 years ago this kind of argument mattered to me more than it does now. I'm so happy to be earning a living shooting both that I just can't slam either when they play so damn nice together.

Ed, I have to disagree with this. While I use my Hasselblads on a tripod a fair bit, I can indeed hand hold them with the 180 @ 1/500th and get top quality results. You had also replied in the other thread about the 40mm lenses about them falling short of high res digital backs. In my direct experience, not test kind on luminous landscape but the real world use the gear to earn a living kind, several Hasselblad lenses are 100+ MP lenses, the 180 CF / CFi included. For example, look at the center of this 100% crop of skiers hiking up a high ridge. To the right of center you can see the shadow of the rope line, on the ridge you can see the skis they are carrying. That means you are seeing details that are 2"-4" inches from some 3 miles away!! This is part of a mural that I stitched from several frames with my 501CM and 180mm CFi lens handheld at 1/500th of a second on my CFV50c back, a photograph that is over 40,000 pixels wide. Try finding those skiers on the full shot below: I hand hold from 180mm and lower all the time, it is not impossible to get maximum image quality, you just have to use good technique.

I do travel assignments now and then and I would bring the following, swap logical digital bodies in if that is in mind: Leica M6 w/ 35mm 1.4 asph, 28mm 2.8 asph. Nikon FM3A or F100 with a Zeiss 50/2 Makro, 105mm 2.5 AIS. The reason for primes vs zooms is two fold for me. 1. If a lens gets wet, soiled or damaged to the point that until I can properly clean or repair it and it is unusable, I have other lenses to use to get the shot. Zoom lenses are all your eggs in one basket, it gets soiled or breaks down, you are done, that is bad news in a place like India. 2. Zoom lenses are always larger and sometimes very much so, can make a person feel intimidated like you are zooming in close to them even if set at the wide end. Also, they are often associated with being "Pro" equipment making them the target of a thief and can even cause access issues in some places like concerts, art galleries and churches for the same reason. I have several zooms I use for different tasks but primes are by far my go to, I see better with them, rely less on the gear and more on my mind's eye.

I compared a friend's CF 250 to my then CF 180 ( have a CFi now ) with a 1.4EX converter on it and the latter combo came out ahead. I'm sure the 250 is a nice lens by Hassy standards but the 180 + 1.4 combo is a lot more versatile to me since I can use the same converter on my 100 and 350.

Couple of points. 1. The highly popular CFV50c back was never half price, it was introduced at $15,500 and a year later dropped into a promotion of $9,995 which is what I bought it at. According to a good source, they had to discontinue it in order to supply Sony 50MP sensors to the new X1D. The goal is to introduce a new version of it with an updated interface and some other niceties. 2. I use that back with CF and CFi lenses ( nearly identical in optical performance ) and they do extremely well, especially lenses like the 50 FLE, 60, 100 and 180. In going to a 100MP back, they might suffer a bit but I suspect that the 100 and 180 will continue to excel.

I own both and disagree, I paid $800 for my 50CF/FLE in 2008 and $1,100 for my 40CF/FLE in 2015. As you can see here, the 40 is not at all that much more bulky than the 50:

Looks like the google search to legacy topics is now pointing to the right links. This was a huge concern for me since a lot of where the site’s value resides is in it’s immense knowledge base, I use it in educating young photographers. I can be patient with this transition, lots to do in the meantime….

Sure hope they bring it back, it's not just what we post now but a lot of years of searchable resources that will be lost. And it needs to be in its own section, lumping into a generic black and white among digital process is like comparing a symphony to a music app on an iPhone.

It might take a bit to flush out the bugs, it’s a huge database I suspect. I’m just glad I exported my gear list before the switch…and my name changed to “db_gallery”…lol!

Hi folks, Looks like 2.0 is back online after a rough first go a few months ago. While 1.0 was still afloat, I made sure to export a PDF of my equipment list, had all my serial numbers dating back to 2001. Looks like that was a good thing because it looks like it is gone. Can anyone confirm if we have lost that feature or not?

<p>Mr. Watson & Mr. Citysnaps,</p> <p>In the past, I have given names of those who earn a living using film like Michael Turek, Michael Gordon, Danny Wilcox Frazier, Jose Villa, Karen Wise and Elizabeth Messina just to name a few. <br /> I have also given examples in how I do it, direct examples of ad campaigns, magazine articles and in the case of the above, a magazine article turned murals. I have also given the names of labs that are doing well with healthy throughput of film keeping the lines at a high quality. <br /> If you want to sit around and say the sky is falling and only focus on metrics that relate to the mainstream and ignore the niche that film use now is, have at it.</p> <p>But when asked a question and I give a precise answer, I expect in turn your respect for that effort and for you to conduct your self within the guidelines on this site, so Mr. Watson, you have been reported.<br> These kinds of remarks are uncalled for and ad nothing to the knowledge base of this site.</p>

<p>In 2016 it was 45% film. Because I just bought a home with 500 square feet of basement / darkroom space, I expect it to go much higher until it is where I want it at which will be 80%.<br /> <br /> For example, I just closed a deal on 8x 10' to 13' foot murals that were shot in a marble quarry on 4x5" Tmax 100. They had to be drum scanned for this size output but that is how a lot of reproduction happened with film well before the digital age so there is no point in saying my film got turned to digital as a means to marginalize the use of it. This job paid over $12K and will likely lead to a fair number of silver gel darkroom prints so it is really the best of all worlds.<br /> <br /> Straight up man, film is back and people really dig it!</p><div></div>

<p>I know of at least 6 wedding shooters in my area and in Denver who shoot film on very high end weddings. Most use either a Contax 645 or a Mamiya 645 and shoot either Portra or Fuji NPH color neg films. <br> It's not fake news, it just the word on the street, people like me who know other pros sharing the info. The buzz is out, even if only a niche fraction of it's former self, film is back and that is that. <br> The notion that film is dead....is the only thing that is dead.</p>

<p>Don't have to apologize to me Mr. Watson, you are the one who always pegs the industry on the dated models of labs when the ones that are left and people are aware of are getting hammered with work. A properly running lab needs quantity to keep a top notch offering and that is what labs like Praus and Bluemoon do. Less labs with excellent online / internet business running at capacity are indeed representative of a healthy niche film resurgence. <br> I think that is the biggest problem with the old guard thinking, because the new business model does not look like the old business model, it is discounted as being wrong or not sustainable. I don't shoot a lot of color film but what I do shoot I have no problem at all in sending it out for processing. <br> Yet another nice nod to film as a great niche alternative to all things software is to be found <a href="http://time.com/4649188/film-photography-industry-comeback/?xid=homepage">here</a>.</p>

<p>To add to the above, more personal experiences being <a href="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=159470">cited</a>.</p>

<p>Film as a mainstream item is not really moving and shaking. But as a niche item it is doing better than it has in a long time. I see more and more articles about it's niche resurgence and experience it directly in terms of my fellow pros and enthusiasts using it now using it more than they used to. <br> I think it is in a really healthy space and I think middle aged to younger people are *far* more positive on it's outlook than say retirement aged people. </p>

<p>And in other news, Kodak re-introduces Ektachrome:<br> http://www.kodakalaris.com/en-us/about/press-releases/2016/kodak-alaris-reintroduces-iconic-ektachrome-still-film</p>