Unknown Film
Comments: 5
I took two 35mm film cameras to Shikine, opting not to take the CoolPix 990 because it wigged out again recently, and things that tend to do this shouldn’t be in your rucksack on a camping trip. (The trick is to take the batteries out and leave it. It’ll start working again when it’s good and ready — an entire week this last time.) This means waiting for the pictures to come back from the lab — more nerve-wracking than usual because I used 3 kinds of film that I’ve never shot before.
For years I used Kodak Tri-X for black and white (and the inferior T-Max when Tri-X became scarce, with Kodachrome for occasional colour) but this time I used Fuji — 4 rolls of Neopan Presto (b&w), 3 of New PRO400 (colour neg), 1 of Superia (colour neg, bought on the island). The black and white film went through the trusty Nikon FM2 (a wonderful workhorse camera brought low by ratty old Nikkor 28mm and 80-200mm zoom lenses) while the colour went through a Contax T2 (38mm).
I expected to find it a bit troublesome shooting only film after using a digital camera where you can rattle off exposure after exposure without regard to cost or how much film you happen to be carrying, but it was a real pleasure (and may have helped me look a bit more carefully). I felt like I still had something of a clue as to where the exposures should be (we’ll see about this soon enough) and that both of the cameras made it easier to shoot for a particular look. No idea if I was on track here or not because apart from using new film, I hadn’t really used either camera seriously for a long time, so while it felt good shooting film again, I’m more than a little nervous about the negs.
The 3 things I concentrated on photographing — the island’s shrines and temples, its cinder block buildings, and (mostly) the rock carvings around Jinata onsen — are all easy marks, so I’ll have no excuses if things don’t turn out as I hope.
•••
Posted to Photographs • 2003.08.31 (Sun) • 21:57
Comments
Posted by resonance 2003.09.01, 04:37
I recently had a chance to revisit my old negatives and slides. I too shot exclusively Tri-x for b&w, and miss that sort of texture in my digital pics. I don’t miss the developing time or expense.
I made analogous observations about my emulsion-based portfolio and my pixel-based portfolio. On the whole, the film shots were more discriminating. Whereas any given digital shot might be bracketed using seven or eight pictures, my rolls of film would rarely have more than one “take” on an image.
I have a nikon 35ti sitting here, the last remnant of my film days, and I can’t quite decide what to do with it. I know if I sell it I’ll miss it terribly (a cooler small 35mm camera does not exist, in my opinion. The 35ti, with its analog dials and such is a work of art itself). I know if I keep it I’ll never use it. Damn material fetishes. Damn them all to hell.
Hope to see your filmic return soon.
Posted by pixelkitty 2003.09.01, 11:21
I still shoot some film, but admittedly not as much as I used to thanks to that damn digital camera.
I use my pentax analogue though exclusively for black and white, and I only use one brand of monchrome film - although the name escapes me right now, the packaging is quite distinctive.
Using my Holga is the best fun though - no apperture or exposure settings, manual winding. Surprises abound.
Posted by jh 2003.09.01, 15:31
resonance —-
miss that sort of texture in my digital pics
I read somewhere (found the link via search and since lost it) that Neopan grain is quite different to Tri-X; finer and somehow better looking. Because I always shoot 400 ASA film, the grain is often noticeable so I’m curious to see if there really is a difference.
Nice to be thinking about grain again rather than JPEG noise artefacts. ;-)
any given digital shot might be bracketed using seven or eight pictures
Hoo, boy —- do I ever take advantage of this. I wonder about developing bad habits though. Could this ability to open the camera rapidly and repeatedly every time decrease your sensitivity to a shot (not exactly the phrase I’m looking for, but you get my meaning)? In my case I’m worried that it does because most of the time the best shot in a series turns out not to be the one where I thought I’d nailed it (and my success rate for film seemed generally a little bit better). I may be imagining things.
I wanted a 35ti pretty damned badly when I first saw one, although having been lucky enough to pick up a Contax T2 from a photographer friend who sold hers means I’m going to have to argue with you about the best compact 35mm.
I tried to shoot a specific range of pictures with it this time. Despite the fact that I’ve owned it for years, I never used it enough to become really familiar with the lens. I’ve noticed it has a lovely tendency to grab hold of any shadows it finds around the edges of the frame and burn them in really nicely (while giving an edge-to-edge brightness in the absence of shadows). We’ll see soon enough if my thinking about this is right.
pixelkitty —-
My wife frequently uses a Lomo (which are related to Holgas, right — or am I completely wrong here?) and that thing produces some amazing pictures. Even on regular colour neg film the saturation can be just astonishing. Never used a Holga but the Lomo is something I’d like to get to know a lot better.
Posted by resonance 2003.09.02, 15:30
Jeremy,
I shot Tri-X because I liked the grain. One of the problems I had with Tmax was it’s “smoothness”. One of my favorite ways to shoot was to push Tri-X to 1600 or 3200. Big, chunky grain. Mmmm. The kind of grain you’d eat with a fork, not a spoon, as they say.
That sort of shooting got harder on the processing end, if I recall, when some Kodak developer [fluid] became hard to find. I think that’s when I started experimenting with Ilford.
In regards to ‘sensitivity’, as you call it, it could well be that digital technologies make one less discerning (?) when it comes to taking pictures. I can’t say that’s a bad thing, at least for me. I recently spent a little over an hour taking pictures of a sunrise on a humid day (1h 18min, according to EXIF data). In that time I took about 224 pictures. No way I would have done that with film, and I’m relatively happy with the results.
Posted by Sean 2005.03.08, 02:05
Hope it isn’t too late to post on this…
Tri-X is one of my favorite B&W films. The tonal range is quite stunning. TMax also has its moments and I’ve found that by pulling it 1 stop it behaves much better. However, I have recently switched to Ilford’s Delta and HP5 for most of my work. (Yes, I am still a 100% film shooter). For portraits, I seem to be favoring Kodak’s BW400CN lately. Super sharp and the tonal range is fantastic with skin.
I have to dig around your site a little deeper and find the photos that go with this post…
Post a comment:
Send This Story to an Enemy
• • •
