anyone still use "real" cameras?

[ArmsMerchant]

You know, the ones that use actual film.

I got to thinking about this the other day--I own two classic Leicas which I used back in the day when did free-lance photography.

Seems like everyone uses digital now.

(That faint whirring noise is Henri Cartier-Bresson spinning in his grave.)

[supperrfreek]

Leicas, those are nice.
I know a free lance photographer. For work and now for his personal stuff he's moved on to digital, but he still has a lot of stuff on film.

Personally, I kinda like film; I like having a physical record of things just in case my computer crashes.

[Young Meth]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

You know, the ones that use actual film.

I got to thinking about this the other day--I own two classic Leicas which I used back in the day when did free-lance photography.

Seems like everyone uses digital now.

(That faint whirring noise is Henri-Cartier Bresson spinning in his grave.)

Greehhfaxxxxxxxxx , pretentious post. In army fatigues @ the public library.

[Crashwangdoodle]

Originally Posted by supperrfreek

Personally, I kinda like film; I like having a physical record of things just in case my computer crashes.

Or in case the goverment hacks in and deletes all of your compromising pictures!

Geez I need to stop reading conspiracy theories

[ArmsMerchant]

Originally Posted by OJ Da Juiceman

Greehhfaxxxxxxxxx , pretentious post. In army fatigues @ the public library.

With all due respect, what is "pretentious" about it? I merely stated facts.

And I'm wearing Levi 501s and a nice short-sleeved sports shirt.

You did get the library part right, though.

[:MAD:ijuana]

I still use my polaroid at times lol i wish they were still around... I actually bought a polaroid digital camera last week as well, polaroid FTW

[Daily]

Polaroids are more fun than digital things.

[BaconPie]

I don't.

[:MAD:ijuana]

Originally Posted by Daily

Polaroids are more fun than digital things.

Agrees, Plus you can instantly develop them without any work

[HippieTrippie]

I still use film, but I'm no photographer or anything, I'm just old-fashioned.

[Unwanted Prostate Exam]

I used to use a Pentax program plus for a while, It took beautiful photographs and it was a great feeling of satisfaction when you're in the darkroom developing your prints. It died on me last week though,
I think i'm gonna go for a sears KSX next.

Fuck I liked that camera alot. Fucking piece of shit.

[kite--]

I went to use my DSLR the other night and forgot how to sync the flash with it - I use film all the time.

[Miaow]

I still use Polaroids quite a lot. I recently got a hold of a Praktica B100 and some lenses for it, hope to put it to some good use soon.

[Rainycity]

theres no such thing as a FAKE camera, unless its doesnt take pictures. Grey fox i hate you more and more every day, now please be attacked by a bear and die.

[a giant pterodactyl]

Originally Posted by Lovecraft <3

I still use Polaroids quite a lot. I recently got a hold of a Praktica B100 and some lenses for it, hope to put it to some good use soon.

lol, these days Polariods are used by 3 kinds of people...law enforcement and pedofiles-serial killers.

i like the digital, instant pictures at the walmart.

[The General]

Haha my dad has a Leica M8 op. I use my dad's canon A1 every once in a while.

[Silverfuck]

I have a Minolta Maxxum 5000 that is totally ballin. I have eight rolls of film I haven't had a chance to develop yet .

[ArmsMerchant]

Originally Posted by Rainycity

theres no such thing as a FAKE camera, unless its doesnt take pictures. Grey fox i hate you more and more every day, now please be attacked by a bear and die.

You poor sap--your ignorance is exceeded only by your ill-temper. Obviously, digital cameras are not hallucinations--that is why I put the word 'real" in quotes. Literate people do things like that sometimes, and there is a good reason for it.

So you define a "real" cameras as one that takes pictures? You fail again, sweet pea--I have numerous old cameras in my collection that are quite real, but none of them can be used for picture-taking as the film for them is no longer available.

[yawanur]

Nah, I just picked up a finepix S1500-


Can your analog camera assemble 3 consecutive shots into a panorama?

[Rainycity]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

You poor sap--your ignorance is exceeded only by your ill-temper. Obviously, digital cameras are not hallucinations--that is why I put the word 'real" in quotes. Literate people do things like that sometimes, and there is a good reason for it.

So you define a "real" cameras as one that takes pictures? You fail again, sweet pea--I have numerous old cameras in my collection that are quite real, but none of them can be used for picture-taking as the film for them is no longer available.

BUT they still can take picture if you did get the film, so yes they still work, but you just can not work it.

[ArmsMerchant]

Originally Posted by Runaway_Stapler

Can your analog camera assemble 3 consecutive shots into a panorama?

Probably not, but a competant graphic artist could.

And my Leicas will still be in great shape--and gaining in value--years in the future when your coolpix has been discarded.

[Unwanted Prostate Exam]

Originally Posted by Runaway_Stapler

Nah, I just picked up a finepix S1500-


Can your analog camera assemble 3 consecutive shots into a panorama?

With the help of photoshop, yes

Can your digital camera work without batteries? No? well my K1000 can princess.

But anyway, how is the S1500?, I was thinking about buying one as I'm too poor to by a true DSLR yet. Is the image quality good? How about the manual features, are they easily accessible?

[yawanur]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Probably not, but a competant graphic artist could.

He's chillin in my camera too!

Originally Posted by Greyfox

And my Leicas will still be in great shape--and gaining in value--years in the future when your coolpix has been discarded.

Cool, I hope you make a couple hundred bucks to offset the money you spend on film and development.

Originally Posted by Unwanted Prostate Exam

With the help of photoshop, yes

The fuji can process them in about 8-10 seconds, but you need to take care in lining everything up for it to look convincing. But you're a photographer, so no biggie.

Originally Posted by Unwanted Prostate Exam

Can your digital camera work without batteries? No? well my K1000 can princess.

Oh no! I suppose I'll have to recharge my 5 sets of four 2500 NiMH AAs, which I paid nothing for, and just so happen to last days and days on end with sporadic use!

Originally Posted by Unwanted Prostate Exam

But anyway, how is the S1500?, I was thinking about buying one as I'm too poor to by a true DSLR yet. Is the image quality good? How about the manual features, are they easily accessible?

I love it, I was in the same situation as you. Image quality is impressive compared to P&S and lacking compared to DSLR[according to reviews], but the hell if I notice- I just mess around with taking photos as an art. I mainly bought it to take advantage of 3/6/15fps burst shots [depends on quality], the superior quality for low price [compared to P&S], and super macro [dad's cam had it and I used it everywhere, I'm a nature geek].

edit-cont.

good review- http://www.photographyblog.com/revie..._s1500_review/
I paid $189, from their best deal link at the top, which has already dropped in the last week.

The manual features are very easy to access- that selector wheel on top can go to either M A S C iirc, all of which are manual or semi manual modes that allow for different types of control. The biggest thing missing is manual focus, but once again I never got involved enough with photography as an art for that to bother me. Plus you can lock the focus by half depressing the shutter, which works for some situations.

I'd be glad to answer more specific questions if you have any.

[ArmsMerchant]

"Cool, I hope you make a couple hundred bucks to offset the money you spend on film and development."

Last time I checked, the M4 was worth more than my car is. And since I worked at a camera store when I was using them, I didn't pay for processing. So there!

[rabbit boy]

To distinguish them from digital cameras, they usually just call them "film cameras."

I don't like the idea of paying for film or having to wait and get them printed out for a price just so I can see them. And I can take as many pictures as I want, as long as I have space to store them. I'm also a computer geek, so the digital fits my needs. That said, I've heard that even the best digital cameras can't compare with the better film cameras when it comes to dynamic range and resolution. At least not yet.

Also, the other guy brought up a point with losing digital pictures. I lost most of my first 2000 photos from a glitch involving my hard drive. Overwritten by other data. Should've backed them up...

[6464]

Originally Posted by Rainycity

theres no such thing as a FAKE camera, unless its doesnt take pictures. Grey fox i hate you more and more every day, now please be attacked by a bear and die.

You should shut your fucking mouth wetback and respect your elders. Oh one more thing I hope you somehow contract feline aids and die.

[yawanur]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Last time I checked, the M4 was worth more than my car is. And since I worked at a camera store when I was using them, I didn't pay for processing. So there!

Hmm... cars can run anywhere from $500-$50000, and I'm too lazy to google your camera...

But damn, I didn't expect free development at all

Touche!

Originally Posted by rabbit boy

To distinguish them from digital cameras, they usually just call them "film cameras."

Would 'analog' fit the bill as well? That's usually the term I think of when differentiating original gadgets and digital gadgets.

Originally Posted by rabbit boy

I don't like the idea of paying for film or having to wait and get them printed out for a price just so I can see them. And I can take as many pictures as I want, as long as I have space to store them. I'm also a computer geek, so the digital fits my needs. That said, I've heard that even the best digital cameras can't compare with the better film cameras when it comes to dynamic range and resolution. At least not yet.

Also, the other guy brought up a point with losing digital pictures. I lost most of my first 2000 photos from a glitch involving my hard drive. Overwritten by other data. Should've backed them up...

Right on! My 8 gb sdhc holds wayyyy more than I'll ever fill up, so I never run out of options. I think it holds around 2 hours of VGA video as well, with a nicer sensor than my miniDV camcorder!

Luckily I haven't lost anything yet, but no doubt I will eventually.

[rabbit boy]

Originally Posted by Runaway_Stapler

Would 'analog' fit the bill as well? That's usually the term I think of when differentiating original gadgets and digital gadgets.

I decided to look it up, and I found this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital...tronic_cameras

If you say analog, it might be confused with one of these.

[tim]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

You poor sap--your ignorance is exceeded only by your ill-temper. Obviously, digital cameras are not hallucinations--that is why I put the word 'real" in quotes. Literate people do things like that sometimes, and there is a good reason for it.

So you define a "real" cameras as one that takes pictures? You fail again, sweet pea--I have numerous old cameras in my collection that are quite real, but none of them can be used for picture-taking as the film for them is no longer available.

Greyfox may be older than the Appalachians, but it has most definitely not put a damper on his ability to own.

Back on topic: My grand-dad owns an old 35mm camera, I forget the brand but it was probably pretty expensive in it's time. We also have a few Polaroid cameras lying around that haven't been used in years.

[NamelessNom4d]

Real cameras are better, but they're more expensive to use and you have to develop the film. Digital cameras are easier to use for the general public, since you can just put the pics on your computer and print them out/send them. If you do photography you better be using a real camera though!

[Unwanted Prostate Exam]

Photography using real cameras is a true art you're the one setting the shutter speed, aperture, film speed, and focusing in on your subject. YOU actually need to know what you're doing to get good results; that's not so with digital cameras, any asshole can use them.

With these bullshit cameras you have to many little 16 year old hipster emo faggots taking pictures of their fucking feet or doing a macro of their eye or whatever the fuck, adding sepia tone, fucking the contrast up the ass in photoshop and calling it "art".
These assholes would be lost in a darkroom.

[yawanur]

Originally Posted by Unwanted Prostate Exam

fucking the contrast up the ass in photoshop

But everything looks so much better!

Not that it's art.

[LiquidIce]

Originally Posted by Unwanted Prostate Exam

Photography using real cameras is a true art you're the one setting the shutter speed, aperture, film speed, and focusing in on your subject. YOU actually need to know what you're doing to get good results; that's not so with digital cameras, any asshole can use them.

With these bullshit cameras you have to many little 16 year old hipster emo faggots taking pictures of their fucking feet or doing a macro of their eye or whatever the fuck, adding sepia tone, fucking the contrast up the ass in photoshop and calling it "art".
These assholes would be lost in a darkroom.

Dude, chill, it took me weeks to counsel my friend that SHIT DUN MATTER! She finally bought a digital camera and took to doing everything manually. And just because some kids call something it doesn't mean it is art - analogically you could say that the kids that took black and white photos of themselves with film cameras were artists while the kids that use digital cams are just assholes. Since when does the tool influence that artistic nature of the object?

Just because a sculpture was made by 3d modelling and a laser, does it mean it is less 'arty' than a sculpture made with a chisel?

Or does it mean that they guy who uses a plate camera is more artistic than a guy who uses a film camera? Well, it kinda seems so, 'cause the dude has to mix the special chemicals, put 'em on plate, take care for the image to capture for 5+ minutes... Ha, he could laugh at all you film novices, you just insert some film and bam, you got a picture! A baby could do it!

See what I'm getting at? The artistic value of an object depends on the subjective artistic value someone percieves, not the tools someone used to make that object.

[ArmsMerchant]

^I am reminded of the Diana Camera vogue of a few years back. The Diana was this laughably shoddy plastic 120 camera--the lens was uncoated, some of the bodies actually leaked light and so on. Some students started using them for serious photography, used the lens flare and built-in soft focus for some really artistic effects.

Details:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_camera

[LiquidIce]

^ Yep, it's the effect that matters, at least for me. Most of the effects of the small digital cameras suck ass. Sepia? Fuck sepia, unless one plays around with the contrast, colors, highlights and tones in photoshop first than a picture taken with a built-in sepia filter will be shit, unless someone is proficient in using the effect to actually make something nice looking. Not overexposed or overly generic, first things that come to mind.

[zTi]

I used to have an SLR camera that used film. Until I finished my class in high school and couldn't find it. I'll never let that one down.

[kite--]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

^I am reminded of the Diana Camera vogue of a few years back. The Diana was this laughably shoddy plastic 120 camera--the lens was uncoated, some of the bodies actually leaked light and so on. Some students started using them for serious photography, used the lens flare and built-in soft focus for some really artistic effects.

Details:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_camera

I have a diana but I prefer to use my holga.

[scyre]

Originally Posted by Unwanted Prostate Exam

Photography using real cameras is a true art you're the one setting the shutter speed, aperture, film speed, and focusing in on your subject. YOU actually need to know what you're doing to get good results; that's not so with digital cameras, any asshole can use them.

With these bullshit cameras you have to many little 16 year old hipster emo faggots taking pictures of their fucking feet or doing a macro of their eye or whatever the fuck, adding sepia tone, fucking the contrast up the ass in photoshop and calling it "art".
These assholes would be lost in a darkroom.

so your telling me that with my pentax k10d and ~30 year old 50mm manual focus lens that when i use the camera in manual mode (which said lens requires), and i set the aperture and iso speed, stop down meter to get the right exposure time, and manually focus in on my subject before hitting the shutter release that im not doing any of what you said?
for the record they had point and shoot film cameras for a long time and people took plenty of those pictures of their fucking feet. what youre mad about is people taking snapshots, not photographs.
i generally cant afford to do film, but when i get the time/extra money i shoot with my ME super or one of my 2 K1000s, but being that i dont have darkroom access, i generally shoot digital. digital is no less real than film, just a different method: sure theres less physical work involved in photoshop vs the darkroom but unless you know the finer points of photography, its gonna look like shit regardless.

[Unwanted Prostate Exam]

Originally Posted by scyre

so your telling me that with my pentax k10d and ~30 year old 50mm manual focus lens that when i use the camera in manual mode (which said lens requires), and i set the aperture and iso speed, stop down meter to get the right exposure time, and manually focus in on my subject before hitting the shutter release that im not doing any of what you said?
for the record they had point and shoot film cameras for a long time and people took plenty of those pictures of their fucking feet. what youre mad about is people taking snapshots, not photographs.
i generally cant afford to do film, but when i get the time/extra money i shoot with my ME super or one of my 2 K1000s, but being that i dont have darkroom access, i generally shoot digital. digital is no less real than film, just a different method: sure theres less physical work involved in photoshop vs the darkroom but unless you know the finer points of photography, its gonna look like shit regardless.

I don't really have a problem with digital photography and photographers that know what they're doing but rather people that let the camera work for them. Nothing makes me cringe more than an asshole with a 600 dollar camera taking snapshots.

[The General]

I use a canon A1 for my film setup currently