Back to basics

I have always maintained that there are three reasons to use digital; known as the three Cs:

Cost.
Convenience.
Control.

Aminstar is a bit of a control freak in my view, and also somebody who needs the convenience of instant feedback. I fear this project won't last long.

Cost, of course, doesn't seem to worry the man.

G

Considering your kit George, it does'nt seem to worry you either!

Amin, I'm in awe of the guts it must take to dump all of your digital stuff. On the other hand I also have to agree with George, you've gone completely mad

George, you got that absolutely right, I am afraid I am a bit of a control freak . Old habits that just passes from one field to the other and when I least expect it normal common attitudes turn into habits and from there it just steps up and this is where it ends .

I remember spending hours sometimes when working on flowcharts and COBOL codes and then having to look for the misplaced dot, or just a full stop through pages and pages of coding because that would have caused an error or create a totally different .exe file by the compiler.

As far as cost is concerned George I think you got it wrong there . Today I can expose a few shots and manage to grab the one I am after when playing with macro in my shed, but there was a time that I needed around 300 shots just to get that one exposed the way I wanted. Just imagine how many roles of film and the costs involved if I were using non digital at the time? Certainly digital helped. So in this case "Cost, convenience and control" was to be had in digital format for me.

But now I am ready to step back in time and want to transfer that control to film. I am really excited with the prospect. Not sure though if I can achieve the same degree of success that I managed with digital, but if I don't it won't be due to lack of trying .


Tim I didn't dump all my digital stuff, I only dumped all my Pentax digital stuff. I am part of that group now that can use the phrase "I shoot both now" , although not both Pentax.

I will be over the moon if I manage to capture some of these with film .

Now I will leave it to your imagination to try to visualise what this image looks like .

I wonder if this image looks over saturated because on one of my monitors where I processed it looked ok, when I open it in my browser on another monitor it seems over saturated. Can someone tell me also if it is? The monitor i work on is usually calibrated with spider 3 so I am hoping it is fine.

Thanks

It's another of your smoky ladies, with a rather baleful left eye.

G

By George, George you seem to spot these ladies at a distance
Same here, the moment I saw it I knew it was a lady, not as sensuous as the previous ones though

I will try to give her some colour and see if she turns more appealing

You're confusing quantity with cost.

Most of my kit was second-hand, designed for film, and acquired when prices were significantly lower than they are now. To replace it today, which is what Aminstar will have to do, I would have to pay several times what I paid originally.

That sort of cost WOULD worry me, I can assure you!

By the way, I have been re-evaluating some of my "old stock" (not listed), and have been struck by the quality of the SMCP-M 1:2.8 100mm. Sharp as just about anything else I have and a lovely, neat little lens, like so many Ms.

If I were a street photographer with a penchant for portraits I would fix it permanently to a D or DS and never use anything else.

G

George, you are assuming that I will want to replace my kit. In which case it would worry me too. I too bought all those lenses when they were cheap.

I am sticking with film and cheap lenses for my Pentax kit, and like you will be looking for bargains only from now on to complement my Pentax kit.


And if you are considering selling it let me know

There are some things left in this modern world that one doesn't need training for.

G

On the contrary, it is about to be promoted to "core kit". But I hope you will benefit from the tip.

I have never used it on film, but it's certainly a star on digital. JR has sung its praises too, I think.

G

George, you have been extremely fortunate, and i'm insanely jealous!!!

Well....Amin,
I have been reading this topic and I must confess: I am at a total loss here.

What are you trying to improve here? Somebody mentioned:

And there you go, sell of your Pentax Digital Gear to go back to basics....

BTW.....I wonder what you are NOT saying here:

Can you tell me what you expect to learn or gain from that action?
Let me enlighten you. You will learn nothing! Nothing that makes it worth to do this.
You will loose big time: Financially, Time wise and on the Quality front.
And the learning part? Quality wise 35 mm film/slide is already surpassed by today's aps-c sensors.
And unless you are prepared to invest big time in a outstanding scanner you won't be able to equalize the output of your K20D.
Understanding the basics of photography have nothing to do with the type of medium you are using to capture the light on.
Just put your camera on M, use a single FL lens and than start with the learning process.

Now.......all of this would make sense if you had decided to go the all manual medium format route.
Take a cheap 6x6 or 6x7 reflex, put in a roll of slide film and be amazed of the the pure quality it is still capable of.Specially compared against todays dSLR's. This will slow you down, think at least three time before you press the shutter and tell you a lot about composition, reading a scene and understanding the light.

I am sorry if I sound harsh or pigheaded......I really don't mean to. It is obviously your choice, and I'll guess coping with the consequences
after your experiment, whatever the outcome might be, is one lesson learned anyhow.

Good luck on your quest,

Hi Amin,

It's a long time since I first "spoke" to you, we never did get the BBQ did we You've come an awful long way since then. Anyway good luck with all your endeavours in the future with film.


I did not think you were old enough to have worked with Cobol, my first programming language was FortranII on an IBM360.


Very intriguing this statement - have you gone "N" or "C":


Whatever - good luck and keep the images coming.



Howard

It does seem a very radical decision, both film and digital have their strong points and by discarding the digital you are loosing a whole side of photography and all that offers.

You must have had your reasons but I am at a loss to understand what they may be, adding a film body I can understand but not totally ditching the digital system, something you are bound to regret in the future once you have come to terms with film you will I am sure feel restricted without the digital alongside.

I do have to agree with what others have said - I love having my MZ-60 but for me I see it as complimenting the (mainly digital) equipment I already have.

Though my kit does'nt really stand up to the considerable amount others have on the community, I still would'nt want to part with any of it.

Amin has his reasons and they are important to him and that's the main thing.