What is it with people that shoot on film?Film is expensive to film, develop and scan.Yet what do they do? They film the most mundane bullshit.Traffic lights. Or some mediocre bullshit to some obscure indie song.Why do they all do this?If you're gonna spend hundreds of dollars. Atleast film something good. But it's like they think the vintage aesthetic will make their shit good.It's like they just want to see what their mundane boring life would look like on film.
>>4467935most retarded thing about filmfags is that they scan the negatives. many of those fags send the film off to a lab and dont even want the negatives back. they just want the digital scans lolthat's a prime example of mental ilness
>>4467936Certain color films are designed for scanning. I scan my negatives to keep a digital contact sheet of them and also print my negatives.Definitely stupid to not want your negatives.
>>4467936You seem upset
>>4468899admit that you only want scans
>>4468906I’m a lurker who doesn’t shoot film
>>4467935beginner film fags shoot mundane shit because it's easy to meter
>>4468907you only want scans
>>4467935and why do you care? are you paying for their shit or what
I absolutely think 90% of people shooting film here and beyond are just hipster faggots and/or people who want to distance themselves from the problems of digital and can't afford a top-end DSLR/MILC.And yet, OP is a massive faggot and should gargle dicks instead of making threads.Who cares if people like doing a thing. That's all it really comes down to.
because it's fundid you guys forget that photography was supposed to be fun?this is one of my favorite systems I own and it makes everything look like a vintage postcard, I don't care I can do it in digital, this is more fun. people always ask you about it and it's a great conversation starter. go outside and enjoy shit you fucking spergs
>>4468940>did you guys forget that photography was supposed to be fun?This entire board minus the maybe 6 or so anons I've noticed, they all would rather bitch about gear than actually enjoy photog. This is a gear board and nothing is going to change that as long as the mods refuse to add more rules.The most fun I've had with photography is when I forget this site exists. Posting shit here is ancillary, and it's the only healthy way to treat this board.
>>4468940A naked chicked swimming in the river asked me what my view camera was. I think she got uncomfortable when I told her it was a camera. It was on a tripod without a lens.
>>4468950Missed opportunity
>>4468952I was with my gf. She loves my photography, but that would have probably been crossing the line lol
>>4467936>>4468899If your process isn't analog from end to end, you should just shoot digital.
>>4469492according to who
>>4469521Johnny Kodak and Tommy Ilford.
>>4469522Fuck those faggots Lucky Chang said that I can do whatever I want
>>4469492why?so i can spray and pray my battery doesnt run out?
>>4469492this is the redpill right hereif you scan your negatives you're living out your mental illness. get help.only film fags I respect are those who develop and print(with an enlarger) themselves. all the others are poseurs and should get on SSRIs ASAP
>>4469536Meds, NOW.
Did a film shooter fuck your dog or something?
>>4467935i like using vintage film cameras. give me a way to shoot digital on those old film cameras and i'll do it. but if the only way to use them is film then i'll do that until. the better question is why does that bother you?
>>4469590Sane post. You've brought balance back to this thread.
>>4469536>making proof sheets is for posers!Kek. This place has the most braindead takes.
>>4469536and why I should care about your respect, turbo nigger
>>4469536i scan my negs cus im a bad boy
>>4469535if you have space for spare film rolls, you have space for spare batteries
>me looking at my kino
>>4471238Based and nice kino viewing room.
>>4467935>It's like they just want to see what their mundane boring life would look like on film.Because it looks less boring and mundane on film.
>>4467936>most retarded thing about filmfags is that they scan the negatives.Some do, some don't. I view them directly with a loupe.
>>4469492Personally I only shoot film so I can upload pictures of my camera on my insta / snapchat story. I just get jpegs back from the lab and tell them to chuck out the negatives. I also only shoot portra 400 so I can film myself loading my f3/t and lining up a shot of nothing for my insta reels / tik tok.
>>4467935Post your interesting photo op
>>4467935When I am being paid to take photos that I want to be technically perfect, I will use my digital kit. Autofocus, spray and pray. Like engagement photos. Boring, perfect looking, digital soulless photos. Like every photo in your portfolio
>>4467935I like the whole process of shooting film and that means also developing the photos by myself and printing them.It's just fun to do it. I don't do it all the time though, because it's a pretty long work: developing, then drying, cutting, printing or scanning. That can take hours. Typically I shoot 5 or 6 rolls through the year.
>>4467936>Diginiggers paying $70 a month for (((adobe))) and spending 50 hours weeding selects out of their 10,000 flat boring JPEGs Not to mention that photography has basically disappeared from the public eye since the digital revolution. Imagine siding with the robots
>>4467935>>4469536shooting film is the only way I can take full advantage of the image circle on my MF lensesif there had ever been a real MF digital back produced commercially I'd be using that (the unobtanium spy satellite sensor one from like the 80s doesn't count)you just can't beat instant feedbackso instead I shoot portra, scan, treat like digitaloh also sometimes I shoot 35mm but I got the camera for free so it's basically just fucking around
>>4471441Its $200 for capture one as a one time fee and then a lifetime of laughing at grain peepers for the cost of electricityOr just shoot jpeg. Its lower quality and if the camera fucks up some setting you’re boned, but lab scans do worse
>>4471456Tell me more about this spy camera please.
>>4471460sorry it was the 90sDicomed Big Shot 60x60mmhttps://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61105838tl;dr not worth even if you can find one
>>4471481Dang. Massive pixel pitch. If it worked well it could be a cool one to use.
>>4471459Capture one expert
>>4467935Because digital is ugly.Digital cameras are soulless consumer slop and the resulting quality of the images is evidence of it. Digital isn't made for artists or anybody with a ounce of creativity. Its made for chink tourists and autists who just want to be able to show off that they have the better camera because of some meme criteria rather than the merit of their photos. I would love to shoot digital because its cheaper but it just looks so sanitised and soulless. It's bad enough the world is soulless, I don't need to spend hundreds of dollars to have my camera remind me of it every time I take a photo.
>>4468916For unimportant shots yeah. Its an extra $5
>>4472072hell yeah brother, your crooked horizon put those digislugs into their place once and for all!
>>4469536>only film fags I respect are those who develop and print(with an enlarger) themselves. all the others are poseurs and should get on SSRIs ASAPbased
>>4472921All forms of analog printing are based. Only a know nothing imbecile would discount contact printing considering that most of the "fine art" printing techniques require it. Look into photo gravure, carbon printing, platinum palladium, etc, and tell me they aren't based. (They mog the print quality of silver gelatine, and especially enlarged silver gelatine prints.)
>>4468940I thought the point of photography was taking good photos not to larp as your mental image of an artist (100% influenced by dumb movies) and being nostalgic about absolete technology
>>4473063No. The point of photofraphy is to argue about graphs, specs, and brands online to justify my choice in consumar grade electronics.
>>4473063welp, you did it, I'm selling all my film shit tomorrow, you convinced me to do it. some bed-wetting teenie-bopper on a Malaysian post card exchange forum old enough to be my kid must certainly know more than me about film. /sthe point of photography is to enjoy something. you are holding the closest thing man has created to a time machine.who cares how you do it, the point is to enjoy it and have fun. too many things in modern society have to have a quantitative value attached to them, or has to have some kind of cost-benefit analysis done to figure out if it's worth doing, ever thought about doing something because it's fun? try it some time. >>4473066that's only on the Internet, the rest of us who go outside and touch grass don't do this.
>>4473071No fun allowed. Making art is very serious business.
>>4473071>some bed-wetting teenie-bopper on a Malaysian post card exchange forum old enough to be my kid must certainly know more than me about film. /sthat is not the gotcha that you think it is man
>>4473071Reminding people your age only highlights how much of an underachiever you are.
>>4473071>Im old so Im right You're in cognitive decline since your late 20s and your judgement is clouded by nostalgiaIm in my 30s and I much preffer to listen to what younger full of life people have to say than people my age or older, all my friends are delusional nostalgia faggots that cant form novel opinions or experience new things and they are probably way younger than you are, thats a depressing thought Young people are not perfect, they lack experience and confidence but at least their brains still work.Be more humble
>>4473082>it's invalid because i said so!You have some growing up to do.
