The choice of camera or film in photography for me seems little different from the choice any craftsman or artist makes in the choice of tools they use to produce their art. You use what works. Because of the technology inherent in the digital process, much is made of using machines and materials that provide the largest amount of information or data, giving us the maximum amount of material to work with. Larger formats and drum scans married with ever evolving ink and printing technology seems to be the order of the day. Yet, how much data is enough? I love working with 35mm, especially small rangerfinders with wide lenses and fast films. Probably because of a journalistic background. There is a joy that comes with the freedom of the format. This bias has not kept me from amassing a room full of other cameras in formats ranging from 120 to 8x10, much to the dismay of other members of my family. Nor has it kept me from trying innumerable chemistries, films and processes to give voice to the images I brought home. Recently, I put up an exhibit of images printed from 35mm negs, large prints made on a 7000. After working for years with the "limitations" of such a small format, I was prudent in my expectations. And quite wrong. The final prints were far better than I had expected. I pushed them quite a bit further than I had planned, and they held up. Were they as good as I could have gotten with a larger format and a Howtek, probably not. But did they need to be that good? People came, looked and seemingly enjoyed. No one pulled out a loupe and complained that they saw this problem or that problem. Perhaps the discussion needs to expand, not what camera or film is best for the technology, but more about how the technology can be stretched to fit the needs of our individual vision. Or perhaps......................? Butch Hulett An afterthought: The 35mm images I talked about can be seen at: http://www.keyesgallery.com/artists/bhulett/index.shtml (the "Sturgis" group)
Message
Re: [Digital BW] Film cameras and negatives
2002-04-26 by butchhul
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.