Refuseniks

Blackal · Post by **Blackal** » Sat Apr 18, 2015 6:53 am

Maybe Video didn't kill the Radio Star..............

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32337778

Al

f90x · Post by **f90x** » Sat Apr 18, 2015 8:35 am

Blackal wrote:Maybe Video didn't kill the Radio Star..............

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32337778

Al

Film is the way forward. (I don't like digital) Nice to see Patrick Joust getting some recognition in the UK. I've been following him for years through Flickr. What he says about film cameras being friendlier is true. People are less enamored with having a modern generic DSLR pointed at them than with an older film camera. Especially if it's Medium Format and I regularly have people comment on my Hasselblad (not a euphemism Al, try and contain yourself) and are more receptive to ad-hoc portraits.

Thanks for sharing the link BTW

dave the german · Post by **dave the german** » Sun Apr 19, 2015 3:13 am

Hasselblad - now there's a name from the past!! Always lusted after one but on a lowly civil service wage could never afford one. Local guy used to use the poor mans Hasselblad - a Bronica 2 1/4 square. Ah, happy days

Gromit · Post by **Gromit** » Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:32 pm

Nice link, Al - enjoyed reading it.

I'm very much in the 'there's a place for both' camp, in the same way as I am for digital vs analogue audio. When both are done carefully (ie properly) they can be beautiful in their own ways so I try not to really compare both as such, but enjoy each one on its own merits.

With digital, one could argue that there's been a 'dumbing down' of the photographic skills we learnt (or fumbled in my case!) in the days of film - and the same parallel can be drawn with the recording/playback of music.

Moot point Steve makes about the hardware - I always get the same reaction when out using my Fuji X100. I photographed a close friend's wedding last August and used the X100 for many of the 'opportunist' people shots. So many folk made comments such as 'wow what a gorgeous camera' and they often feel threatened by someone pointing a DSLR at them. With the little Fuji, it seemed they wanted to be in the photos, and as a result were far more relaxed. The fact that it's virtually silent helps too.

f90x · Post by **f90x** » Sun Apr 19, 2015 10:03 pm

Gromit wrote:Nice link, Al - enjoyed reading it.

I'm very much in the 'there's a place for both' camp, in the same way as I am for digital vs analogue audio. When both are done carefully (ie properly) they can be beautiful in their own ways so I try not to really compare both as such, but enjoy each one on its own merits.

I think when I say that I don't like digital, I mean that I don't really know how to use it. I believe that digital needs proficient use of Photoshop in order for the images to look acceptable for me and unfortunately I don't have that skill. I still have a Lumix GF1 and it's great for holiday snaps and as a walk around but I still like using my Olympus XA for that too.

With digital, one could argue that there's been a 'dumbing down' of the photographic skills we learnt (or fumbled in my case!) in the days of film - and the same parallel can be drawn with the recording/playback of music.

Moot point Steve makes about the hardware - I always get the same reaction when out using my Fuji X100. I photographed a close friend's wedding last August and used the X100 for many of the 'opportunist' people shots. So many folk made comments such as 'wow what a gorgeous camera' and they often feel threatened by someone pointing a DSLR at them. With the little Fuji, it seemed they wanted to be in the photos, and as a result were far more relaxed. The fact that it's virtually silent helps too.

Yeah, people shall be far more receptive to he X100 than a big lump of SLR. It's a beautiful thing and to the uninitiated looks like a much Oder classic (film camera)

Blackal · Post by **Blackal** » Mon Apr 20, 2015 5:45 pm

Perhaps the use of 35mm film - is analagous to the gamekeeper only taking one bullet for his rifle, when culling deer?

When you only have limited shots - you take more care and make them count.

In the digital age - you can go for burst-fire or just multiple shots, with no financial penalty.

Al

Gromit · Post by **Gromit** » Mon Apr 20, 2015 5:49 pm

Definitely a point worth making, Al. Saying that I'm often out and about with my camera and notice folk with DSLR's making a royal racket with the things going off at lord-knows-what FPS and thinking wtf? Maybe call it 'splatter photography' or 'hit it with as many rounds as possible - you'll get one right eventually..but you'll kill the picture too'.

Personally, I'd rather slow down and think about the picture - one reason I love the Fuji X-System cameras so much.

Blackal · Post by **Blackal** » Mon Apr 20, 2015 6:03 pm

Yep! We could all be deer-stalkers if armed with a machine-gun

Mind you - at the IOM TT - I set the DSLR to burst-fire, on a manual focus - set to a specific spot on the track.

Even then - I still ended up with photos of an empty road

Al

boxerscott · Post by **boxerscott** » Mon Apr 25, 2016 10:25 pm

I`ve pondered if you had to pay for every pic that was snapped with a phone would you still see all these peoples making a bloody nuisance of themselves? Most images by phone mean nothing and are of shite quality. What really pxsses me off is when we are at Theatre and the Mongs do not bide by the rules and insist on filming proceedings

Digital does have downsides but many positives when used wisely.

Hayden · Post by **Hayden** » Mon May 02, 2016 7:18 pm

boxerscott wrote:

Digital does have downsides but many positives when used wisely.

Definitely, its the ability to share pictures with family and friends via email or whatever that makes digital useful. There is fantastic software available for touch up or manipulation, the ability to see photographs just after taking is more than a little useful, modern digital cameras are fantastic, I have a fantastic ( old now ) Nikon D200 and photoshop, all a man needs...

So why do I lust after my old F2aS, Durst enlargers, FP4/HP5, seeing an image `appear` as you rock the dish etc etc....

Nice find Al

f90x · Post by **f90x** » Tue May 03, 2016 10:18 am

Hayden wrote:
boxerscott wrote:
So why do I lust after my old F2aS, Durst enlargers, FP4/HP5, seeing an image `appear` as you rock the dish etc etc....

Nice find Al

because you're making something. It's tangible and tactile. It has soul.

dave the german · Post by **dave the german** » Tue May 03, 2016 5:24 pm

Got a Durst enlarger I'll sell you

Hayden · Post by **Hayden** » Wed May 04, 2016 9:54 pm

dave the german wrote:Got a Durst enlarger I'll sell you

Buying an enlarger is not a problem, its having a room to use it in and all the stuff that goes with it that`s the problem..

`because you're making something. It's tangible and tactile. It has soul.` perfectly true Steve
Faffing around on a computer screen is definitely not the same

dave the german · Post by **dave the german** » Thu May 05, 2016 4:54 am

tell me about it - I bought this with the intention of printing my own black and white stuff again but haven't got the time or the space to use it - how did I manage all those years ago under the stairs with a blanket covering the outside of the door!!??

Nucci · Post by **Nucci** » Thu May 05, 2016 8:38 am

Great article, I've still got my 35mm SLR (Ricoh KR-5) but can't see myself ever using it again. I'm sure I've got some rolls of Ilford XP2 packed in a box somewhere!

I worked in a camera store which did developments as a teenager and I was the lackey who had to empty all the various tanks with used developer etc. some of that stuff was nasty - digital is a lot cleaner that's for sure!

www.boxertrix.com

Refuseniks

Refuseniks

Re: Refuseniks