New 50 year old toy.

[TerryMiller]

Wow... Who remembers what its like to set up a negative in a large format camera. Using a focusing screen while focusing and getting the lighting/framing/composition/animals/garbage/mountains/rivers/etc. etc. etc. then holding your breath waiting for that magical "this is it" moment when you pressed on the shutter assuming you had the right speed film, right focus angle, right depth of field, so on and so forth... for one shot!
Now, you see "photographers" taking 3000 frames for a wedding venue, and photo-shopping to get a decent album... and you see that not one of the pics has the catch light in the right place on the model's eye,
I have to admit, in general it has been great for the hobby getting a lot of interest without having to learn the basics, but it has also creating millions of mediocre at best photographs, which will never have a shot at creating that iconic National Geographic cover picture of View attachment 332883
It's a shame. I feel we have a lot more to give and are surrendering to being lazy. This is my 2 bits as a newbie, and I promise to dust off my Canon F-1 or god forbid my Mamiya ProS 67 and take some pics (while using a light meter and applying the rule of 1/3's). Happy new Year all!

While I have the respect for those that go the "technical" and "artistic" method of photography, I've NEVER claimed to do the same. I'm one of those that wants to get the shot so that I can view it later and know that I didn't miss out on something that piqued my interest. So, yeah, I'm one of those just taking snapshots, but I enjoy the heck out of doing what I do.

Years ago (prior to June of 2017 when I set up my Smugmug account), I had some pictures on Photobucket and used that source to put pictures into forums. Then PB sent me a notice one time that if I wanted to continue to use them for that purpose, I needed to pay them $400 per year to do so. So, I went to Smugmug that only charged $300 per year for their top professional's accounts. (I didn't go with the top account, but one just below it.)

Something I discovered at Smugmug is that they kept track of image views, popular galleries, and even what sources "referred" others to view my pictures. Mostly, the viewers are from here and Glock Talk, but some are from some RV forums.

Thus, I have to give thanks to the folks here at OSA that have helped astound me in how many "image views" that there have been since 2017. Just this month, there have now been more than 2 million views.

Thanks to all.

 

[scootertrs]

I agree with you wholeheartedly! I just miss some of the "what ifs" something had been a bit different. The point and shoot system is terrific for that candid, it just happened moment. If you had to focus, adjust speed, depth, etc. etc. it would have been missed. Me for one, am glad that there are so many photographers everywhere with equipment whose quality far outstrips anything I could ever afford for a nickel on a C note and in your shirt pocket (not a camera bag-or 3 totes).
Keep on snapping, I will do the same, but if the subject calls me, I will try to give it just a bit more attention and effort.
I have never been one to be a proponent of publishing my work, so I have not joined any professional association since I left SAFS (Southern Association of Forensic Scientists) where I was a crime scene reconstruction expert as well as other areas of expertise. There we could not risk the snap shot because you would risk getting disqualified during a hearing or an inquest because of your not being able to explain details. I have been tainted by that and I believe I will carry that for the rest of my life. For now, be safe and have a
Happy new year!

 

[GorillaG]

Found a Canon F1 at a local antique store. Camera and two lenses for $42.00. Just got it back from DC Camera in Dell City, he did a good clean, lube and alignment job on it.
For the younger folks here, this was Canon’s first professional camera, made to compete with the Nikon F and F2. Lots of journalists carried these tough as nails cameras. Waiting for the temps to warm up a bit so I can run a roll of film through it.

What is this thing called "film" that you speak of?

 

[Cold Smoke]

Wow... Who remembers what its like to set up a negative in a large format camera. Using a focusing screen while focusing and getting the lighting/framing/composition/animals/garbage/mountains/rivers/etc. etc. etc. then holding your breath waiting for that magical "this is it" moment when you pressed on the shutter assuming you had the right speed film, right focus angle, right depth of field, so on and so forth... for one shot!
Now, you see "photographers" taking 3000 frames for a wedding venue, and photo-shopping to get a decent album... and you see that not one of the pics has the catch light in the right place on the model's eye,
I have to admit, in general it has been great for the hobby getting a lot of interest without having to learn the basics, but it has also creating millions of mediocre at best photographs, which will never have a shot at creating that iconic National Geographic cover picture of View attachment 332883

It's a shame. I feel we have a lot more to give and are surrendering to being lazy. This is my 2 bits as a newbie, and I promise to dust off my Canon F-1 or god forbid my Mamiya ProS 67 and take some pics (while using a light meter and applying the rule of 1/3's). Happy new Year all!

I remember when that issue hit the mailbox. If I remember the picture was used to exemplify the genetic legacy of Alexanders conquest of the known world and that girl was from a remote mountain village. If they’d only waited a little bit they could have used 23 and Me.

That’s one of those photos you see for days after you look away from it.

 

[scootertrs]

I remember when that issue hit the mailbox. If I remember the picture was used to exemplify the genetic legacy of Alexanders conquest of the known world and that girl was from a remote mountain village. If they’d only waited a little bit they could have used 23 and Me.

That’s one of those photos you see for days after you look away from it.

It's the difference between Ansel Adams with the Yosemite pics or Clyde Butcher's Clamshell Orchid series and Instagram. There is room for everyone, but that girl on the cover is one that I still can see her eyes today as if yesterday or be one of the millions of pictures on Instagram with their 5 seconds of Wow! I never had the ability or the artfulness or discipline of Adams or Butcher, but recognize their efforts as being viewing screens to sights otherwise not to be seen by other mortals. Oh and I doubt that any one of those could have been done on an iPhone w Photoshop.

 

[Pulp]

Recently found a Pentax K1000. I replaced the light seals and ran a roll of film through it. Sure like this little camera.

 

[Pulp]

I finally ordered the stuff for developing color. Here’s a few of the results. Fuji 400, Canon AE-1.

 

[kd5rjz]

I finally ordered the stuff for developing color. Here’s a few of the results. Fuji 400, Canon AE-1.

Those look great, I've spent a lot of time with an AE1P back in the day.

Are you using a jobo to develop?

 

[kd5rjz]

Hard to believe anyone would want to bother with film and the extra cost.

The digital camera surely gave rise to the numbee of pics taken

I use it because of the resolution. A decent used digital medium format Hasselblad setup will run you about $60k. The same setup with a 120 film back will run you less than $10k and yield higher resolution/less pixelation/smaller grain size and typically better contrast.

 

[Pulp]

Those look great, I've spent a lot of time with an AE1P back in the day.

Are you using a jobo to develop?

No, Paterson reel and tank.