Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,972   Posts: 1,558,670   Online: 985
      
Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 234567891011121314 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 135
  1. #71

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by JBrunner View Post
    Not true. I shoot commercial on film semi regular, particularly food.
    Like I said, it depends on your market and niche. No, I don't see any wedding photographers or sport photographers shooting films. Sorry, it isn't happening.

  2. #72
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    Like I said, it depends on your market and niche. No, I don't see any wedding photographers or sport photographers shooting films. Sorry, it isn't happening.
    I'm not just shooting large format. I'm not shooting weddings on film, for instance, but I am shooting bridal portraits, boudoir, pregnancy portraits, etc, on film. I feel your statement is overly general because while the majority of work, particularly pro work for consumers might not be being shot on film, the statement that it can't be done is mistaken. It can be done and is done all the time. These are choices, not rules.

  3. #73
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,678
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    Like I said, it depends on your market and niche. No, I don't see any wedding photographers or sport photographers shooting films. Sorry, it isn't happening.
    Wrong. Wedding is one of the types left where film is still being used. Maybe not the cheapo weddings, but Jonathan Canlas and other well-known wedding photographers prefer film. Just the latitude of negative film makes it a valuable tool when trying to get detail in both white dresses and dark suits.
    Your statement is way overly broad.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  4. #74

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Wrong. Wedding is one of the types left where film is still being used. Maybe not the cheapo weddings, but Jonathan Canlas and other well-known wedding photographers prefer film. Just the latitude of negative film makes it a valuable tool when trying to get detail in both white dresses and dark suits.
    Your statement is way overly broad.
    Exception isn't the rule. I know the majority of wedding photographers do not shoot film, period. The market for wedding photographers isn't focusing on shooting film, period. No one who is trying to make a living or side money shooting weddings would be shooting film, period. If you are an established wedding photographer with several decades of experiences you may shoot film for the special purpose shots. Someone who has gotten into photography for the past 5 years or so and managed to make some good money on wedding photography won't be shooting film. This is not happening.

  5. #75
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,678
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    Exception isn't the rule. I know the majority of wedding photographers do not shoot film, period. The market for wedding photographers isn't focusing on shooting film, period. No one who is trying to make a living or side money shooting weddings would be shooting film, period. If you are an established wedding photographer with several decades of experiences you may shoot film for the special purpose shots. Someone who has gotten into photography for the past 5 years or so and managed to make some good money on wedding photography won't be shooting film. This is not happening.
    I did not say it is the rule. You said it "is not happening", but it is. I said that is an overly broad statement, and it is. Most are not using film, but that is not the same as no one, "period".

    There's a reason Kodak still sells color negative in 220.
    Last edited by lxdude; 11-30-2012 at 10:47 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: typo
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  6. #76

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    The highest state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,990
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    It depends how you see it. You can't expect to shoot any paid gigs with film nowadays....unless your film photography (large film format I assume) is something unique.
    You are almost right, the fact is that you can't expect in the coming years to shoot any paid gigs unless your photography period, is something unique. I shoot over half my work on film, the other on digital for now and expect to only be using the latter beyond 2015 for strictly full motion content generation for ad, corporate and documentary film work.

    What you have said above is just far too broad to apply to this industry anymore. There are far too many nuanced cases of creative people using anything they want and people lining up to pay for it to pigeon hole it into a "dpreview-esque" type of thinking...
    "I'm the freak that shoots film. God bless the freaks!" ~ Mainecoonmaniac ~

  7. #77

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    The highest state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,990
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    Like I said, it depends on your market and niche. No, I don't see any wedding photographers or sport photographers shooting films. Sorry, it isn't happening.
    I am doing my first wedding in over 20 years, 3 hours of work in shooting the art side of this high end wedding for nearly five figures...all hand printed from IR film in a real darkroom...they sought me out, not the other way around. I also shoot Winter sports for editorial and ad work, again, a lot on film because I can and my clients like it...
    "I'm the freak that shoots film. God bless the freaks!" ~ Mainecoonmaniac ~

  8. #78

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by PKM-25 View Post
    I am doing my first wedding in over 20 years, 3 hours of work in shooting the art side of this high end wedding for nearly five figures...all hand printed from IR film in a real darkroom...they sought me out, not the other way around. I also shoot Winter sports for editorial and ad work, again, a lot on film because I can and my clients like it...
    Look, for the fact that someone is paying your more than 5k to shoot a wedding...it means that the client is rich. Two, you are an established pro. This is rare. You can't compare yourself to the rest of the market. Do you think someone who is going to charge around 1k for shooting a wedding would be shooting film? I doubt it. And then you have the modern day, hipster couples who wants some photos to post on Facebook and expecting to see over 100 wedding photos. Do you think they would be happy only seeing a handful of print enlargements and nothing else? Maybe not. And for the general sport photographers or event photographers who often need to capture charity events....do you think they can capture over 1000 participants crossing the finish line with a film camera? I don't think so. I am referring to the general market. Not the top of the food chain.

  9. #79

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    The highest state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,990
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    I am referring to the general market. Not the top of the food chain.
    Exactly, and that market is all but vanishing sir, so why is it that when ever the so called "market" is discussed at all on the net, it instantly drops to the lowest demographic in terms of both earning power and creative output? This baffles me...

    But most importantly in terms of this discussion, photography in general is undergoing sweeping changes from top to bottom, so in my opinion you can't even use a broad based approach anymore to describing what is really going on, it is just far too varied when attaching a label to it.

    Even if one pro in the whole world is using film in their work, then film is being used in paid work, period.
    "I'm the freak that shoots film. God bless the freaks!" ~ Mainecoonmaniac ~

  10. #80
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vic., Australia.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,632
    Images
    15
    <*yawn*>
    I am amused by the assumption that film is all the go for such events. Where did this idea come from, by taking trends in the USA into account? Please, for accuracy, analyse on a global scale and don't rabbit about how popular film is to one person when the reality, on a global scale, is quite the opposite to millions of others. We'd all like to use film on a continuing basis, but how long for is a matter of conjecture, with now chinese whispers suggesting that Fuji will cease two more emulsions in the new year. After Kodak, then what? Ilford? And...?

    It is true that scan few professionals shoot film for weddings; I've known two for more than 25 years and they can get the IR effect, if and so desired, using digital. No big deal at all. Being paid five figures is all well and good, but I suspect they're just splashing cash rather than thoroughly checking portfolio work, especially since you have not shot a wedding in 20 years. So you think it is easy to jump back in and jump right out and snap!, it's delivered? The truth is that professional work is a grind (film or digital) and does not always pay well, as you seem to be bragging about. The industry is littered with failures due to competition, not lack of skill. There is nothing particularly spectacular about film as opposed to the variety available in digital: the world discovered this 10+ years ago. People should not be deluding themselves that just because there is some film about means there is a demand for shooting anything from weddings to corporate to billycart derbies based on one market alone, eg. USA-centric. If we jump to Australia, you won't see film being used in corporate and wedding events because of the much higher quality obtained and the speed of delivery, and the cashed up brigade don't pay based on egotistic overtures of punch and pizazz. Even the fastest darkroom worker is no match for the established digital hoi-poi




 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin