Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Has the film been finished yet Zed ? I do watch these 'back to film' threads with interest because I would like to see if anyone, using digital, that went back to film because they yearned for the old ways and felt it may offer more, did actually get something or indeed anything.
zed, Best of luck.... It is a good job you have not a 250 shot film back fitted to your camera. 
We wait in anticipation.
Well here are a few I've taken. These are largely test shots that I took to see if the camera I bought off of eBay, a Canon EOS 5, was working properly.
Camden Town Tube Station
Camden Market
Bar Sign
Wrecked Car
Romford Dogs
Romford Dogs
All colour photos were shot on Kodak Ektar 100 whilst the B&W was Ilford HP5 Plus
Slaughteredlamb - Are they edited digitally .... The reason I ask is that they are very good and one of the things about the film threads is that some people see the advantage of film is the quality and 'straight out of camera' simplicity of film rather than shooting film then reverting to a digital process to 'create' an image. Some obviously embrace a mixed journey and that is as valid as any route. I do like your images very much, whichever way they were created.
Quote: Slaughteredlamb - Are they edited digitally .... The reason I ask is that they are very good and one of the things about the film threads is that some people see the advantage of film is the quality and 'straight out of camera' simplicity of film rather than shooting film then reverting to a digital process to 'create' an image. Some obviously embrace a mixed journey and that is as valid as any route. I do like your images very much, whichever way they were created.
These films were processed only. I then scanned the negs using my Plustek Opticfilm 7600i 35mm film scanner using Silverfast SE software. Within this software you can do minor adjustments to exposure, contrast etc. I'm 99% certain I didn't do anything to them in Silverfast or if I did it was incredibly minor. Once scanned I did then open them in Photoshop and did do a bit of dust removal that the scanner missed and applied minor contrast/curves adjustment on the last B&W photo and the bar sign. Other than that they are essentially straight from the camera. The thing I found with the Ektar stock is that I just loved the look straight off the neg and didn't want to change anything about it. Thanks for the comments, I must admit I was surprised at how well they came out as I was really just running the film through the camera to see if the camera worked or not and didn't really give it that much thought.
Some excellent results, Slaughtered lamb. Good composition and a nice variety of subject matter
Here's a film image from a recent trip to the Isle of Harris
.
This was taken on a Yashicamat 124G twin lens reflex which I bought for £100. Film was Kodak Portra 160, now my favourite film.
Hmm.. There's nowt wrong with the quality from EOS5 and Yashicatmat is there.. (also useful/interesting comment about Kodak Portra). I've a handful of oldies ranging from tank-like, but pristine Nikkormat to Bronica ETRSi and Yashicaflex. I'm ancient enough to have used film from a kid and I continue to kid myself I'll try them one day, but this is an encouraging insight and spur to actually do something about it...thanks (I think....) guys...!!
The more stuff I see shot on film the more I want to shoot film. There just seems to be a 'feel' to film that you don't quite get with digital. That's not to say that one is better than the other, just that they are different and both valid. I have my heart set on a Canon 5D MKIII but know that I have no means of affording it and there are definitely times I prefer shooting digital over film but I love the fact that I can and do now shoot both. I would love to shoot medium format too but without the means myself to scan it puts me off buying a 120 camera. That said, looking at your lovely photo landscapepics makes me want to do this even more so
One thing that people might not realise is that the available films have improved in recent years. Whilst some film types have disappeared, other new ones have appeared. Kodak Portra is a good example, released in 2011 I think; it's noted for it's wide exposure latitude, meaning that it can cope well with being underexposed or overexposed. It has fairly soft tones, thus it's popular for portraits, but I also find it very good for landscapes.
Most of my film work is now on Portra, apart from some old stock of other stuff that hasn't been used up yet.
For those wanting to experiment with 35mm film cheaply, Poundland in the UK stock 24-exposure Kodacolor 200 film for £1 a roll and I just picked up some Agfa Vista Plus from the same source. Mostly I use these films for testing any old cameras I buy / have donated. However once you're sure a camera is working OK, a better film like Portra is worth the money as it can cope with a wider range of lighting conditions.
Slaughteredlamb, how much of the look you are getting is down to the scanner, as looking at the 1st two images I would say that looks like the colour response of the scanner is a fair part of it. Have you direct prints from negative to compare ?
I found my A570 gave a similar colour response in the underground, like the images BTW.
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Related Content
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
Vanguard June 'Landscape' Competition - Win TIPA Awarded Gear!
1st June 2013 - 30th June 2013
This month, Vanguard are giving you the chance to get your hands on TIPA 2013 awarded gear in our 'Landscape' competition.Up for grabs are two ABEO Pro 2...
Featured e2 Photo
June's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
