It's simply a matter of using the right tool for the job. LF film is becoming more of a unique tool than it has been but for those that have used it for ages it's very natural. Those just picking it up are learning the advantages.
It's simply a matter of using the right tool for the job. LF film is becoming more of a unique tool than it has been but for those that have used it for ages it's very natural. Those just picking it up are learning the advantages.
No one wants anything other than files anymore and so how you get that file is far less relevant than the unique images you produce. For me at this point I would charge a big premium to shoot film as the workflow is more involved and there are no labs left locally so the film would have to be shipped off for processing. For my personal work the workflow is irrelevant.
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
Some art directors are aware of particular photographers' use of LF film and will hire them because of that. Yes, a premium or at least some line items in the estimate is appropriate for film, processing and quality scanning. In Chicago there are still labs like Gamma Imaging doing E-6 and drum scanning on a very professional level but time and $$ needs to be worked into the estimate and the assignment's time frame. For me that's local but you're right, you can't get 3-hour E-6 processing & delivery at a local pro lab everywhere anymore.
Kind of illustrates my point a bit. FWIW having worked and taught in Chicago a couple of months a year for the last twelve years, I have had allot of problems numerous times with Gamma and would never go back to them, which leaves what in Chicago? I'm asking because I don't know. IME labs are not what they used to be and few and far between. It used to be that there were good labs in every decent size city and we could get film processed before we left town and see what we did. Those days are largely gone. At least with a digital workflow I am personally in control of my product and my time and can meet tight deadlines.
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
I do not think that digital is faster because their picture quality is low and you have to spend lot of time using PS. If you scan LF film to raw and process in PS - you can do anything! I like to do it a traditional way but like you said everyone wonts files. Digital capturing is in my opinion not good way to go, and not faster.
Sorry but this is naive. I spent many years shooting film and scanning it for clients. Because of the scanning I spent that much more time on the computer, endless hours scanning and then spotting etc. etc. And look at my clients and tell me that my quality is low.I do not think that digital is faster because their picture quality is low and you have to spend lot of time using PS. If you scan LF film to raw and process in PS - you can do anything!
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
Film is for me like a dogma. I know how to get what I wont, because film (generaly) is constant. Of course there are slight changes but they are marginal. FP4+ has been the same at least for 20 years - I know what I can get! But with digital I need a year to understand it, but after 2 years I have to buy a new one because the old one got less MP then the new one - and I have to start to learn it all over again. In that sens film is faster, I see the seen, I shoot it and I know what image I have. I do not have to reply the shoot or rapair it in PS
Good for you. I have no dogmas in my studio just tools. I shot film exclusively until about 5 years ago and still do. That's 50 years of shooting film, 33 years as a full time professional. Twenty+ years teaching it at the university level at a couple of the top schools in the country. Digital is just another tool and except for the odd project the only sensible tool in today's commercial market.
Last edited by Kirk Gittings; 29-Jan-2012 at 18:23.
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
Actually doing it in Photoshop takes me far less time than it used to take to get everything perfectly parallel and perpendicular in camera. I'm not a pro though, maybe professionals who do architecture for a living and have an established system can do it faster in camera. For me, I've spent as much as 15-20 minutes photographing a window, for example, on the second story or higher and getting all the lines right.
But apart from that, the architectural photographers I know (all four of them : - )) don't just use Photoshop to get things right. They use a tilt-shift lens on their digital cameras. I just started using one as well and even with my limited skill I find that the combination of that lens and Photoshop is quicker (and IMHO at least as good) as doing it in camera with a LF camera. I'm frankly surprised that any professional architectural photographer would still use a LF camera.
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
Bookmarks