- Joined
- Oct 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,652
- Format
- 35mm
If you're bulk loading film and misusing ECN-2 for stills, you clearly value false economies over qualitative common sense.
I agree it can (ideally should) be an aesthetic choice. However, I can also get behind the argument of economy. If you're afraid to push the shutter button because of the cost per frame, and as a result, fail to learn/develop the craft of photography - well, that's a missed opportunity and from that perspective, I can see why someone would want to try and get hold of the cheapest film possible. Of course, one could also divert to digital capture. Nothing wrong with that, either.
Very nice! I’ve been thinking about trying the Kentmere films and you’ve convinced me.
Frankly, if someone can't learn what they need to know about the basic craft of photography with 10-20 rolls of K400, deep questions need to be asked about the quality of education and the mindset of the learner
I agree it can (ideally should) be an aesthetic choice. However, I can also get behind the argument of economy. If you're afraid to push the shutter button because of the cost per frame, and as a result, fail to learn/develop the craft of photography - well, that's a missed opportunity and from that perspective, I can see why someone would want to try and get hold of the cheapest film possible. Of course, one could also divert to digital capture. Nothing wrong with that, either.
One thing I learned from 4x5" large format work -- even when film was "cheap" -- was to put more time into each image. Don't just run through a 36 exposure roll and end up with one or two good shoots.
I translated that approach a long time ago to all of my smaller roll film formats -- and nowadays it saves me a lot of moolah.
And if you just can't resist snapping away endlessly, get a half-frame camera -- or a Nickelodeon PhotoBlaster with 150 separate pictures on a 36-exposure roll!!!
And right now, TMY is as cheap as it has been in five years. Lats week I bought some TMX and it was $7.23 per roll of 120. It hasn't been that cheap in years.
In 35mm I still buy 100' rolls of Delta 400, and even though it hasn't been that many years since it was under $100 for the roll, it's still so much less expensive than buying it in cassettes. (Currently about $140 per 100' roll, which means you can roll 36 exposure rolls for about $6.50 each, which is really good for a premium "fast" film)
That said, you can buy Kentmere in 100' rolls for $80, which is about as inexpensive as it gets. Kentmere has its limitations, but it's a perfectly serviceable film if treated wisely. I've used the 100 and 400 speeds and found it very respectable. Yes, I can see a difference in how it performs in terms of tonal scale and sharpness/acutance, but it's a very good film for its price. (Examples here and here and here) Sharpness can be enhanced by using an acutance developer - PMK or Pyrocat HD do exceptionally well.
Sure, film was so much less expensive ten years ago (I remember buying 25 sheet boxes of FP4 for about $90 in 2017!) but everything has become expensive. Buying a respectable latte somewhere is now between $5.00 and $8.00, which seems pretty outrageous compared to five years ago. That's life. Costs rarely go down. Photography has always been expensive.
For me, the bottom line is: putting a price on my emotional wellbeing. If I gave up film photography, I would be very unhappy, and emotional health is priceless.
It's just that some people spend an immense amount of effort trying to delude themselves into feeling owed cheap professional grade film like some sort of cosplaying cinéaste manqué, then get upset when economic & quality control reality (and cinema industry demand) arrives.
I'm sorry, I don't see this happening a lot, to be honest. The problems people report with motion picture (color) film don't relate to the fact that these products end up in the user's hand at relatively low costs, or the technical differences with still-camera film. Quality control on Kodak's Vision3 and 5222 product appears to be excellent; we would have seen problems by now if they were there, but they simply aren't. The technical issues people run into are for the most part associated with process control which would be just as problematic for C41, contrast control for the B&W product, and, at a great distance the no. 1 issue: color balancing color negative scans - which, again, is what people find difficult with C41 just as well.
Those are really nice shots. I'm with Warden, I'll give Kentmere a try.
…..Photography has always been expensive.
For me, the bottom line is: putting a price on my emotional wellbeing. If I gave up film photography, I would be very unhappy, and emotional health is priceless.
Yes, that's the only philosophy that really helps here and you have my sympathy. I too feel that photography has become more expensive in the last few years but like you I am stuck with it.In the end I will find a way to do what I enjoy, it's just getting harder for many reasons.
Yeah I'll put my hand up and say that Vision 3 is gorgeous used for stills, either scanned or optically printed.
Maybe FP4 used to be $80 per bulk roll, but then I used to be able to go to my local pub and get beer at a pound a pint. Time marches on, and many factors (all discussed at length) mean that cheap film is likely gone forever.
That doesn't mean we can't still be frugal in some ways. Switch to Kentmere or investigate whether Fomapan suits you. Look out for deals on short dated bulk rolls. Check out Freestyle's house brands and so on.
Photography has always been expensive.
For me, the bottom line is: putting a price on my emotional wellbeing. If I gave up film photography, I would be very unhappy, and emotional health is priceless.
Ultrafine Extreme 400 is back and I love the stuff. Push a stop or two with no issues. It's not as cheap as it once was but it's still better than paying Tmax prices.
I used to be able to go to my local pub and get beer at a pound a pint. !!
Wow I remember being annoyed when it went to two bob!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?