Learn Film with Me

A Red Light Doesn't Make Your Film Immune to Overexposure!

2010-04-08T23:41:00.000-07:00

Hello everyone! As you know, I don't post much here because it isn't that often that I have new info about film to share. I laugh out loud thinking about what has happened today. My new friend, Becca Dryer, and I got together to chat film. She shot her first roll the other day and I couldn't be more proud!

She has a Holga (I have been wanting one forever), and she agreed to let me shoot a roll with it. I need some new head shots so I used the my roll trying to get some self portraiture going. We will see how that goes. Anyway, after looking at her little Holga book, we found out that you can use 35mm film in a Holga and it will take panoramic pictures. We were anxious to try this, but had some difficulty figuring out how to get the film back into the 35mm film canister after we had taken the pictures. We thought we could put a red cup over the light in my bathroom and load the film into another camera and manually wind it back into the canister. The photo above is a picture of our makeshift dark room. Taken by Becca with her handy iphone. Yes, that is my hand holding up a red cup over the bathroom light.

We made that transfer and were feeling very proud of ourselves until we got the film back from one hour Walgreens and learned that is was all overexposed beyond recognition. Oops! Chalk that one up to learning. It all just seems so silly now, I laugh every time!

The self portraits were on a different roll and I will post them as soon as they get back from the lab. Fingers crossed!

How to expose for Shadows with a Light Meter

2010-03-02T13:44:00.001-08:00

I was recently asked how to expose for the shadows and so here is a pretty concise description:

For metering the exposure for the shadows, you basically hold the light meter under the persons chin (but not so close they are uncomfortable) and point the light meter toward the ground with the ball retracted so it is in the shadow of the face. Sometimes I lie to the light meter and tell it that I am shooting a slower film speed to give myself an extra stop of exposure just to be safe.

Can you use Digital to learn Film?

2009-12-31T14:06:00.000-08:00

I had a friend as me this one the other day and I thought about what I would tell myself if I wanted to go back in time and do this to save money etc. Here is was I would say to me:

Absolutely you can elimiate some of your learning curve using digital! There are some things that you can only learn shooting film (like just getting used to it, see the rest of this blog for more info), but if you are strapped for cash here are a few things that will help you become a better film shooter with digital.

1. Shoot in manual. Pay attention to how the different setting affect your pictures including shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. This is just basic photography skills that you can learn on digital to improve yourself as a photographer. When you shoot with automatic settings, you don't have an much control and troubleshooting your manual results are a great way to learn. There are photographers who have narrowed their look to an exact science and this is a way to learn enough to figure out where you want to take your style. When you know about photography in general then when someone tells you about their specific way of shooting, it makes a lot more sense.

2. Shoot only a specific number of pictures. A roll of film has about 30 images on it. If you are taking a friend out to practice photography, instead of taking 300 pictures and narrowing it down to the very best 50, try limiting the whole session to 30 (that is 1 roll). Try to make every image count. You will think a lot more about what you are doing. Pretend that every time you click your shutter, it is costing you a dollar.

3. Read your manual. So many people intend to do this, but they never do. The first photography book I ever read was the manual. The first time I read it, I experimented with each step and immediately looked at the results on the computer to solidify the information. This is one of the best things I ever did because when I heard other people talking photography, I could ask questions and the answers made sense. Shortly after the first read, I read it a second time. It made more sense the second time because it answered questions I didn't know I had yet. Then when I would learn something new, I would think, "I remember reading something about that in my manual" and could quickly reference the information and get my answer. If you have lost your manual, you can look it up online and chances are find a free PDF online of your camera's manual.

There are some things you can only learn with film. Each camera is a little different and takes some getting used to. Also, if you are shooting with film, you can use a light meter that helps with exposure. If I don't have a light meter, I shoot with AV(aperture priority) or TV(shutter priority) settings and overexpose2-3 stops, but I still know enough about the settings to know what I want to use and when. If you are not sure, stick with manual until you have learned enough to know what you like. You can use AV and TV with digital to practice as well.

What is aperture?

2009-12-30T12:51:00.000-08:00

I have included in earlier posts a very brief description of what aperture is and want to expound based on a question I got on facebook. As you can see from these images the aperture refers to the size of the hole letting light into your camera. The larger the f-stop, the smaller the hole and less light for taking a picture. There are some specific properties associated with small aperture vs. a large aperture. A small aperture (high f-stop such as f/16) lets in less light which might be tricky in a low light situation and when you take the picture most everything will be in focus. When you are shooting at f/2 your film can get a lot more light and the plane of focus is very small. Any questions? Beuler?

Oh, one more cool thing, the shape of you aperture determines the shape how how blurry lights in your pictures look. For example, check out this picture. How would you guess that the photographer got the lights to look like hearts? hint: it's kind of a trick question

The images and more information are posted in this photography article

The rest of the story

2009-12-29T11:14:00.000-08:00

Do you remember this post? I was heart sick because I thought I ruined some of my pictures. Well, I told Richard's what happened and they left the film in the developer longer than normal and all the pictures looked great when I got them back!! It saved my skin! The pictures were eventually published on Snippet and Ink a national wedding blog. Check it out!

Another exeriment with overexposure

2009-08-26T11:19:00.001-07:00

I have been playing with the idea of overexposing a few stops and just shooting without metering that much. If I am at 2.8 aperture, then shooting at like 1/125 or 1/250 in the shade and just going for it even if the light changes. Check these out. I was at a session and my light meter started giving me the same exact reading even when I moved it to a very different lighting situation, so I obviously knew it wasn't working. I just tried to make a conservative estimate of what the light was at erring on the side of overexposure. I took both of these images right at sunset and my setting for both images was 2.0 1/60 (it was my conservative estimate, remember? But I forgot to give it a few more stops when we went into the direct sun). I am guessing that I was about six stops over in the sunny one and maybe 3ish in the shaded one.

Look how sunny and colorful the overexposed image is! It's very Hawaiian vacation-ish and this is Oregon!! The water was grey to the natural eye!!

Exposure Comparisons

2009-08-20T14:00:00.000-07:00

I have been looking forward to the results of this test for a while! Let me explain, the close series is taken with the 400H. The image on the far left is one stop overexposed, the far image on the right is 6 stops overexposed and each image in between represents one stop difference. The second series (more zoomed out) is the same thing, but with the 800Z. Notice how the more overexposed the image is, the more soft and less contrasty it becomes. Now, I was really surprised there wasn't a greater difference in the images and the two images side by side were taken from the 400H test and I just played with with color and levels in photoshop to make them look really similar. You have so much latitude shooting film! When in doubt, just bump up your exposure! None of the images in the two series are photoshopped.

With that, I am going to announce my studies in film are mostly complete! I don't have enough content to continue posting everyday, but every once in a while when I learn something new, I will try to share it.

Fuji Neopan 1600

2009-08-20T08:00:00.000-07:00

There are a few of the getting ready pictures from the wedding I posted yesterday. I was so ticked that these turned out so well. I metered for the light side of the room and the dark side (when I switched to the angle of the shadows. At one point, I forgot to switch back to the light side and overexposed some of the images a total of two stops, but they looked great! It was so impressive to have that kind of latitude with true black and white film. At one of the last weddings I did (but haven't gotten the film back for) I wanted to take a bunch of candid shots of the guests talking and enjoying each others company, but I wanted to shoot it film. So what did I do? I exposed for all angles of the area I was shooting and there was about a one stop difference from the shadier side of the area to the brighter side. I am really liking to overexpose everything at one stop just as a given for protection(because underexposing is like the worst thing you can possibly do), so I metered for the shadiest area and exposed over that one stop. That means that all of the images I shot of the guests were either one or two stops overexposed depending on where they were standing and what angle I shot it. Those will be posted at a later date and I hope they turn out, but I thought I was pretty clever on that one :)

Some 800Z

2009-08-19T08:00:00.000-07:00

These are taken right out of camera and 1/2 stop overexposed. I exposed for the shadows with my light meter and the light meter was telling me that it was overexposing at the aperture I wanted 1.5 so I doubled the shudder speed to make it only .5 over. These are straight out of the camera taken at f2.8 with the Pentax 645. I did have some issue with flair as you can see and although I do like flair sometimes, it just doesn't look very good on film and I also want to have control and not ever be surprised when I get my film back. For that reason, when I buy my Contax (which is hopefully soon) I will be getting a bellows for it to block all flair. Jon has one on his Contax and says it works like a charm and way better than the lens hood that goes with the Contax lens.

Some Bad Ones

2009-08-18T08:00:00.000-07:00

What went wrong? I don't know...could have been because I didn't have a light meter? Okay, so these are some that I wonder about. They are weird looking. What do you think? They were shot with 400H.

2009-08-17T08:00:00.000-07:00

Wedding Day

2009-08-14T08:00:00.000-07:00

The next two posts are from the day we had "Bride and Groom" models. I am just throwing these up with not a ton of details, they just need to be posted :) They are all taken the Jon Canlas way with exposing for the shadows, very simple! I hope I can replicate the look at home, ha ha. We will see when I get me next batch of film it!

I also have some pictures that I took from the rooftop restaurant at the hostel where a lot of us stayed. What a view!!

I don't want a learning curve!

2009-08-13T23:00:00.000-07:00

It is so difficult to make mistakes shooting film! Today at a wedding I fear that I underexposed some of my images by 4 stops! Luckily Mel was there shooting digital as my backup so there is no harm other than to my hopes and dreams of getting some amazing film shots. I feel like I am getting so much better at shooting film and I rocked that roll other than my one tiny little issue of completely ruining the roll!

Ya know, that is the second time I have messed up my exposure because I forgot to check the aperture before shooting away, the first time I caught it after shooting only three images and just re shot them, but this time, my heart broke a little inside.

On a more positive note, I got a bunch of film back from the lab (I have been shooting a roll or two at every wedding this year and I LOVE what I am getting! Here is a pretty image that I love. Click on it to see it bigger because this little thumbnail just won't do it justice ;)

More of the same

2009-08-12T08:00:00.000-07:00

The context of some of these has been explained in earlier posts. Another head shot of Polly (my main testing-out-my-own-ideas model) and touching strangers in the harsh harsh sun. Film is amazing!

2009-08-11T08:00:00.000-07:00

These are from the second day of shooting when we had families as models. Again, these are straight out of camera. I can't wait to post some of the new film I shot from my last wedding! It is my first attempt to get this amazing stuff on my own!

2009-08-10T08:00:00.002-07:00

A few more random pictures from the day we had "engaged" models. Obviously a lot of these aren't centered or composed perfectly and that is because most of the time I was shooting over other people's shoulders. I was so glad to be able to get an idea for how these films can look in a variety of situations with someone who knows what they are doing guiding us in the process. I was often offered the opportunity to be the main shooter for some situations, but it was the first day and I was nervous and just wanted to soak everything up that I could. I got better on the second and third day not being nearly so timid. The second day is when I did a lot of the head shots I posed earlier and that was really fun.

Shooting film in the bright bright sun

2009-08-09T08:00:00.000-07:00

I dedicate this post to Sara Gray who is my running partner and had to listen to me raving about these images specifically ;)

What do all these images have in common? Yes, they were all taken at the Film is not Dead workshop, they are all modeling for engagement style pictures, and they were all shot on film and developed at Richard's. What floored me about these images is that they are all shot at like 4pm in the summer! The sun is almost the worst it can get and we are using the sky as the background!!! When we were shooting these, I was really just getting used to film and freaked out a little to shoot it. I was skeptical of the possible results because these are conditions I would NEVER shoot in using digital. I just wouldn't do it! I would find some shade or a wall or wait till the light gets better. On the last image I don't like how much of her face is in the sun light, but the picture isn't ruined like it would be with digital. This is amazing!! The colors are soft and pastel and it's just beautiful. These are all straight out of camera!

Michael Escalera

2009-08-08T08:00:00.000-07:00

...sharing some helpful articles in this post.

I especially love this article which has some really awesome comparisons between film and digital!

Touching Stangers

2009-08-07T09:09:00.000-07:00

Something looks wrong about these images besides the fact that everyone in these are stangers!! You may recognize some of the workshop attendees here and we coerced random people into posing with us and trying to make it look natural, ha ha. I can't remember if this is 800z or 400h, but it looks like I didn't expose it properly. The one with Shannon isn't too bad, but doesn't is look like that stanger is sniffing her hair. Anyway, that is all for now.

2009-08-06T08:54:00.000-07:00

This was a study I did with Polly as my model using off camera lighting. In the first image, I am one huge steps away from Polly (very scientific measurements) and had the flash on my camera set to +0 and the off camera flash is set to +1 (you can see in resting on a garbage can later, like I said, very scientific). In the second image, I am two huge steps away and in the third image, I am three huge steps away. The reason I did this was to observe the differences in the flash with the true black and white film using auto settings to find out what I can count on at a wedding. I was thinking that probably my direct flash wouldn't look that different in the each image because it was set to +0 and my camera can tell my flash what my settings are and tell the flash how far away the subject is based on my lenses focal distance (camera's are very smart these days). I also anticipated that my off camera flash would be stronger in comparison when I got farther away because it thinks that it is the same distance as the camera (not nearly as smart) and you can see that is exactly what happened! The rim light in the last image is a lot stronger than in the first because I am so much farther away but the external light isn't changing the distance at all.

A Question in my Email

2009-08-05T10:59:00.001-07:00

I got a really good question in my email today, which is really exciting! Here it is:

My name is Teresa and I live in Baton Rouge, LA. I have been converting to film the past 3-4 months. I'm dying to know what Bill Pyne said to you about customizations. I played phone tag with Bill and I haven't had a chance to talk to him yet. If you have time and it's ok to reveal what he said, could you fill us faithful readers in... At some point in the near future, I'm planning on taking Jonathan or Jose's workshops. I am loving your new blog and although I've been shooting with the Contax and a NikonF5, and I'm learning, it's very helpful to have your writings to compare notes with.Thanks for all the information!

Here is what I wrote to her:

Thanks for the email, so Bill said that they can adjust the color and density and that is pretty much it. I know they have different settings that they dial in for different photographers and Brian Greenburg (the owner of Richard's) told us at the workshop that you can look at the images on their facebook page and describe the look you want to achieve using the images from their facebook that were taken by the rock star photographers and they will dial you in similar settings. The example he used was, "You might tell us, I want my stuff to look like Jose Villa's but with a little bit of this other photographer's blues." I know they use two scanners, the Niritzu and the Frontier. By default they scan on the Niritzu, but photographers like Jose, swear by the frontier. I was a little frustrated with them for not explaining this option to me from the get go. You have to be very specific if you want the Frontier and even then, they will want to scan on both for you to compare, probably. They really want people on the Niritzu because it is way faster for them to use. Hope this helps!

Added note: Actually I think their Niritzu settings are pretty cool too. Tanja Lippert has her stuff scanned on the Niritzu and it is beautiful. I was really stugging to get my exposures down at first and I wasn't sure if my issue was with the lab or my own skill level, so that was really skewing my feelings at the time.

2009-08-05T08:46:00.000-07:00

Here are some random BW images from the workshop that I like. All were shot on 1600 Fuji Neopan true black and white. I am still trying to find my comfort zone with black and white because you don't have the ability to overexpose it as much as you can get away with it using the 400H but I love the look of it! Most of these images were exposed using the reading that Jon would call out to all of us, but some I guessed and some were because we used Polly's light meter (the ones at night). I love the palm trees with the tree lights in them, I was obsessed with them the whole workshop!

2009-08-04T09:23:00.000-07:00

These are some fun ones of Polly from our night experimenting. I think I had the flash at zero and there was a street light and I think we exposed these for the sadows like we were taught in class. They turned out really fun, I thought, but I forgot to have her take off her light meter from around her neck, ha ha.

My fellow attendees who are awesome!

2009-08-03T08:16:00.000-07:00

(Sorry these pictures are in no particular order! I keep uploading them and fixing it and then they dissapear in my bloggger, so this is as good as it gets for now.)

I don't think the last post properly demonstrated how excited I am to have gotten my pictures back from Richard's. The last post has a few of those images, so obviously I have them and I tell you what, they rocked my world! They were everything I hoped them to be and I will be showing them to you over the next short while. I am making a point to add no corrections at all to the final product!

Kristopher Oar - a really talented photographer just starting out. He is like a world traveler and super nice.

Carolyn (more about her later)

Lindsey of Green Apple Photography - is that the cutest name or what?

Jonathan Canlas - he taught the workshop and he rocks! You will probably get sick of me talking about him, but I just learned so much from the workshop. I encourage everyone to go who is wanting to get into film and have a way faster learning curve than would be possible without it!

Polly- you will see a lot of her later because she let my test out some ideas with her as my model, she is also from the UK and has an amazing accent!

Shannon - She has so many juicy stories, I could listen to hear all day! Oh, and she bursts out into song spontaneously which it way to fun to ignore so I happily join in :)

Jax - I had to get a pic of all her cameras! She was like a pack mule the whole time with a bunch of gear to carry that was almost bigger than she was :)

Jennifer, Kelli, and Manus are next. I wish I had more time to get to know them! Jennifer lent me her sharpie and Kelly rode in the van with us and we chit chatted and Manus drove the van and hung out with his pregnant wife a lot :)

Andrew was awesome, he shared his album notes with me one of the days and helped me analyze some information I received from an unnamed high up at a certain booth of which I cannot mention. I couldn't find his website :)

Carolyn looks so hardcore in the BW image of her at the top of this post. She is hilarious did anyone else give her credit for being so funny? I don't know, but she was funny. And she offered to buy me an ice cream, but I didn't take it, though I did finish Jonathan's which sounds disgusting, but it was really hot out. Yikes, I am missing her website too!

Ryan - is a local Portland photographer! Jeff and I actually got together with him and his wife before the conference to say, "Hi" as described in an earlier post.

These were mostly shot with the 400H and my Pentax with an 80mm lens. The BW is with 1600 exposed at 3200.

2009-07-30T20:39:00.000-07:00

I must first say that you can see these much bigger if you click on them to compare. You remember all the film conversions I was talking about a few posts back?

Calculating aperture and shutter speeds

Here is a perfect example of how that went wrong...

Jonathan called out the exposure meant for 400 speed film and I had 3200 speed film in my camera (well it was 1600 and I was pushing it to 3200). Instead of halving three time for three stops of difference to let in less light for that very sensitive film, I doubled it three times and overexposed the bottom image by 6 stops!! Jon tells us that you can overexpose 400H 6 stops and it's still beautiful (which I hope it true), but this was true black and white which you are supposed to expose properly if you want it to look good (unless you are exposing the whole role as a different ISO in this case 3200 and then you tell the lab to develop it as if it really were 3200 and it looks like 3200 when you do that, did you know that about true black and white film? I never knew that!)

2009-07-30T20:33:00.000-07:00

Light meter update: So I tried using it with my digital today and it didn't work very well. With film, the best way to take a reading is to expose for the shadows, but when I did that for digital, it just blew out my highlights. I really don't want to get in the habit of doing it just right for digital and then shoot film and accidentally expose the film improperly because I am so used to using the light meter with digital. That is just the type of thing that will get me into trouble later, so I will stick with what works for exposing my digital (if my digital lasts much longer, Moo-ah ha ha).

I just got my light meter

2009-07-29T10:49:00.000-07:00

So, a few more tidbits from the workshop...

Turns out that keh.com is a great resource to buy used film equipment. Jonathan says that he only buys stuff that is in the bargain bin because it lasts forever. I picked up this light meter, the Sekonic 508, for about 250! It retails new for like 600 and it's the same light meter than Jonathan uses. I also found the user manual online. I am just over here feeling resourceful :) Can't wait to use it, I think that this is the key to consistantcy and I might want to use it for my digital too, I wonder how that would work?

Photo taken from www.graycard18.com

I forgot to post these from a little while ago!

2009-07-28T12:22:00.000-07:00

I have pictures, these posts are always so much more fun with pictures! Here are some images almost straight from the camera (I added a little more darkness to the backs...

I was shooting with my in camera light meter at about 1/2 stop overexposed, which is really hit and miss if you think about it. If my light meter lands on something dark, it will overexpose even more and if it lands on something light it could very well underexpose the images. I actually think I got some really perfect exposures going in the first and last images, but the ones in the middle I am suspicious are a little underexposed because the colors went a little shifty on me. I hear that happens when you underexpose. The dark areas are a little too green and the skin tones are like perfect, so that makes me think that my colors shifted a little in the dark areas and would be a side effect of underexposing. do you see how the contrast and the colors are really nice in the first and last image? I am thinking that is due to a better exposure. I am definitely getting a lot closer to where I want to be, though!

And here they are again with some density correction. I am on this kick lately where I want my black to be almost a true black, so here they are and then some thoughts...

Still Waiting for my film, in the meantime...

2009-07-27T16:46:00.000-07:00

Are any of you on the journey to learning film or switching to film or rediscovering film? If you would like to share some of the things you have learned, I would love to get some guest postings going on! As you can tell, I am trying to post a little something every day and would love to get some more content this way.

Okay, so the layout of the workshop was that we learned about film the first day and how to shoot weddings that tell a story on the second day and on the third day we talked about getting published and also learned about Instproofs (an online storefront solution). I have summarized all that I can at this point without having the pictures to share and talk about, but I am not sure how much of the other topics would even be that interesting to people since it is totally off the theme of the blog. If you are interested in shooting with film and also weddings, I HIGHLY recommend this workshop. It rocked my world!

800Z film

2009-07-26T16:18:00.000-07:00

I can't wait to get my film back!! I cannot wait. I have to stop thinking about it! With the workshop we were provided free film and free processing from Richards. There is something about having to wait for the film that makes me appreciate it that much more!

Okay, today I am going to tell you what I learned about Elizabeth Messina. Rumor has it (and I got this from a very reliable source, ha ha) that Elizabeth shoots her color images exclusively with 800Z film. If you will look through a couple of her images, you will notice that they all have a very magenta color cast to them and it's very pretty. That is a natural characteristic of Fujifilm 800Z pro film and most photographers who shoot it have their lab correct for it. Cool, huh? Those images are probably very close to straight out of camera.

Light Metering

2009-07-25T16:09:00.000-07:00

Another huge thing that I learned at the workshop is how to use a light meter. I feel like saying, "scrap all my other rolls, now I am cooking!" Okay, so I am excited. Almost as excited as when I first sent in a couple rolls to Richards and was convinced they would come back looking like the best stuff in the whole world only to have my high hopes dashed to pieces. The only reason my hopes are not that high again is because I love to learn from my mistakes and not get on that roller coaster! I thought I knew how you use a light meter because I have used one before, but Jon taught us how to expose for the shadows so that you aren't losing any detail in the shadows and it basically is the same as overexposing the film by one stop. Before I was metering in camera and so I can't really say how the actual exposure was turning out, ya know? It seems like getting really good at exposing film correlates highly with getting really comfortable with your light meter. So I bought one! Hurrah! Jon told us about a website called keh.com where he buys all his used stuff on the cheap. I bought a light meter that retails for $600 for $250 in the bargain bin! Once I get that I am really tempted to practice using it with my digital camera as well to compare the results and get my exposures spot on. I can look at the back of a camera but still sometimes struggle with exposure, HELLO!!

Oh yah, how to use the light meter, so Jon would how the light meter at a 45% angle toward the ground and that was the trick. Seeing him do it over and over the whole workshop was very cool. I think I could do it when I get mine. Simple yah? Very cool!

Calculating Aperture Stops

2009-07-23T15:49:00.000-07:00

I felt really silly at the workshop because my new friend, Polly, told me about the shutter speed stop calculation and I had to ask Jonathan to make sure it was true. Ha ha, turns out that you can do the same thing with f-stops. It's kind of tricky with this one, but if you double the f-stop, you are making a two stop difference in the light. So f2 is two stops brighter than f4. "And what is one stop brighter?" you may wonder. f2.8! That is just silly. I know and still don't get it, but f2.8 is very common, so I think about it this way. 1.0 1.4 2.0 2.8 4.0 5.6 8.0 11 16 22 32 The red f stops are my base and they are easy to double and half. Then just think about the most common f-stop you can that is in between and there you have it! The one stop jumping system. So in the last post I told you about how I shot 3200 speed film in and had to take my shutter speed from 1/500 to 1/4000 to get the proper exposure (oops, I meant someone hypothetically did that, he he). There is only one problem, the camera only goes to 1/1000! I would need two more stops of less light! Can you think of the solution? instead of shooting at f2.0, I could shoot at f4.0 and still get the perfect exposure! (Triumphantly smiling)

Thank you all for your comments!

2009-07-22T16:03:00.000-07:00

I am so silly! I didn't have my blog set up to email me when I get comments and I just now discovered that I have a bunch of wonderful comments!! I am a stickler about responding to comments because it is awesome for search engine optimization even if it is just a quick note. Anyway, I fixed the problem and will be responding diligently from now on!

Do you know how to calculate stops with ISO and Shutter Speeds?

2009-07-22T15:32:00.000-07:00

Okay, finally I am blogging about last week. I am so exited!! The first day, Jon talked about film and the different kind and how to shoot it. I have known for a long time that if you want to give yourself one stop more light, you can double the ISO setting. So twice the ISO (or ASA) is one stop difference. Well, did you know that doubling the shutter speed also gives you a stop less light? Which would mean that doubling the shutter speed gives you one stop less light. WOW! So that means that f2.0 1/500 and ISO 400 is the same exposure as f2.0 1/1000 and ISO 800. I never had to know that with digital, but here is why it is important to know: When you shoot film, obviously you can't just change your ISO setting if you need more light. Let's say you are at a photography workshop and the instructor calls out the proper exposure for the image, "I am shooting this at 2.0 1/500" Lets just say that earlier in the day he instructed everyone to use 400 speed film and lets just say (hypothetically) that you have 3200 speed film in your camera because you were shooting low light the night before. Whatever would you do? Well, 3200 speed film is how many stops higher than 400? That's right, 3 because you would say in your head 400, 800 (double that's one), 1600 (double again that's two), 3200 (that's three!). Then you would say in your head, "I can't shoot this at 1/500 it will be too overexposed, so I need to figure out how to get 3 stops less into my shutter speed!" 1/500, 1/1000 (that's half the time, one), 1/2000 (that's half again, two), 1/4000! Then you would say to yourself, "Wow, I feel like a genius! Tomorrow, Aperture calculations!

Creativity is in the Moment and in the Recipe

2009-07-21T13:26:00.001-07:00

That is what Bill from Richards told me today. I had the best conversation with him about film and getting my work to where I really want it to be. I showed him Kate Towers website and we talked about what things the lab has control over and what things have to be done in camera. It was really cool. Thats all for now. I am so crazy busy getting everything caught up so that I can post my thoughts and note from the workshop. I have so much to share!!!

Michael Escalera

2009-07-11T18:19:00.000-07:00

I got the coolest email the other day! It was from Michael Escalera who shot film, switching to digital, and is now going back to film. He networks with some of the big wig film photographers such as Leah McCormick and others. Anyway, he wrote to me offering to answer any questions I have about film. I was so flattered just to be noticed!! We have emailed a little back and forth and Michael wrote this tidbit to me and gave me permission to share it. He also said that if there is anyone out there with questions about film, he is more than happy to be helpful in answering. What an inspiring person!

Here are the links to his work:
http://www.escaleraphotography.com
http://www.laketahoeweddingphotojournalist.com

Here is what he wrote:
"When I send film to Richard I'll be getting the processing, negatives, 4x6 prints, and medium scans for about $24 a roll including shipping. So let's say that I use 20 rolls at a wedding, that's $480. Now, I am already used to paying WHCC about $96 for roughly 300, 4x6 prints that I give to my clients. So if I subtract that $96 from Richard's $480, that means that comparing digital to film I'm paying them $384 to do all the processing,color correction, etc for me. Let's say from the time I spend downloading cards, backing them up, importing them, working on them in Lightroom,working on them in Photoshop, etc that it takes 30 hours total. That means I'm paying Richard $12 an hour to do everything for me, and I can spend the time marketing, learning, networking with friends, other wedding professionals, etc. That's money well spent in my books.

"Here's something interesting. In seven years of using film (1998-2004) I never once lost a single roll of film, ruined any film by accidentally opening a camera back, dropping a roll of film, etc, never once had any lab lose my film, or mess up my film, and never once had any mechanical issues with my film gear. Upon going digital in 2005, I had four Lexar Pro CF cards become corrupt in three years. I tried several recovery programs and none of them worked, but Lexar recovered about 70-80% of the data. I had a Nikon D200 (less than a year old) go bad on me at a wedding, and I've also had a Canon 5D stop working at a wedding (the motherboard burnt up). I'm only one person, but right now my stats favor film.

"Here's something else the cost of digital equipment. Imagine how much money we have spent on software, CF cards and readers, hard drives, and the sheer amount of time to learn everything. Meanwhile, digital files continue to change format, and we'll need faster computers and more hard drives to keep up with the file size. Can you imagine a MkIII or something similar with 40+MB file? I recently sold my 30D (which is obsolete technology) and several other odds and ends. With the money I have been able to purchase a total of three EOS 3 bodies in as-new condition for less than $200 each. I also picked up a Mamiya 645 with the lens and back for dirt cheap. All of these film cameras will probably still work great in 10 years! Heck, my Yashica 635 is over 50 years old and it still works perfectly.

"The reason I mention all of this is because they were all factors for me in my switch to film. By the way, I received the coolest note from my client for next June in the D.C. area. She noticed on my Journal that I was moving to film and asked if they could still receive digital negatives. I educated her that yes she would still receive a disk and that I could shoot only digital at their wedding (because I had already booked them a while ago) if she preferred. Here is her reply:

""If you'd like to use film for us, I'd have no problem with it! You're the professional, you know what works best, so whatever you feel like using is fine with me! :)"

"I'm fully convinced that good clients hire someone because they love you and your vision. The medium we choose is probably not a consideration. This note is turning out to be book and I'm sorry for rambling on! I guess I get really excited film, and that's something I never got with digital. My goal is to be using 100% film by the end of this year and then actively target that market. Film isn't for everyone, but it sure fits the look and work flow that I want."

2009-07-10T14:16:00.000-07:00

This is my first set of Black and White images that I got back from Richards and I couldn't be more tickled! Don't these look classic and romantic? They were also extremely flattering. I shot these Jose Villa style. Auto expose (overexposed 1 stop) and direct flash auto set to underexpose 1 stop.

These are a lifesaver because the images that Mel got at this wedding with her digital camera (although amazingly exposed) are missing from the card!! I am so thankful that these came through so beautifully! It's like Christmas!

I have so much more to share, but I must go pack now for my "Film is Not Dead" workshop!

Here are the Pictures from Blue Moon

2009-06-17T13:25:00.001-07:00

Check out the difference between these two first images!! They came back from the same roll and the same lab, Blue Moon. Could this be the difference between shooting the 400H with proper exposure vs. underexposing the film? I have heard that you can overexpose, but never underexpose because you won't be able to save the image. I think this might be an example of the difference perhaps. The darker picture with icky color happened later in the session, so I don't think I compensated for losing the light perhaps.

Again, the scans looked better than the prints! Blue moon was insistent that their prints were better than the scans because they print from the negative instead of from the scan, but the scans looked better to me. I can't show you the prints here to compare, but they were very similar, but slightly dingier too.

These sets of three are a study in the scan (far left), the scan with my editing, and my digital equivalent. Even thought I have a lot of kinks to work out with this system, I am hopeful once again that in not too long of time, I can get the film to look amazing to me. Amazing enough to eventually switch over. I am really digging the film image I took with my tweaks applied to them. In the top set of three, I think the image is a little under exposed, so it was harder to get the colors to look right, maybe?

Here are my thoughts on exposure. So, the photographers I adore all overexpose their film and when I did it, it just looked to contrasty to me, I am liking this a little better. When I shoot so close to a proper exposure, though, it is very easy to underexpose if the light changes a little bit. In the first test shoot, I was shooting 1.5 stops over, and this one was right on. I think I might try overexposing .5 stops. It doesn't seem like that stop difference should make that big of a difference, but I think it might.

I just talked to Jake at Blue Moon

2009-06-10T10:28:00.001-07:00

Do you like how all my posts start with "I just..."? Kind of funny. So, Jake from Blue Moon explained some things about the way the lab works there. I can tell that they take a lot of pride in their work and they process of the film. They print their proofs from the negatives and he explained that a lot of labs print proofs from the scan, which takes away from the look of film. That is very interesting. I wonder how Richards does it. They are definitely more expensive and actually they are very close in price with Richards. If I send them one roll of 36 exposure color neg film, it will cost about $32 (26+shipping which I think he said was 6)to get it developed, print proofs, scanned, and shipped back to me. At Richards, I am looking at 18 for the developing and scanning, 4 for the proofs and 9 for shipping, that totals $31. Richards is actually cheaper!! They take about twice as long processing, though.

I felt like Jake at Blue Moon was more approachable than Bill at Richards. He explained to me a lot of details about the process and invited to come to the lab since it is my first order and see the results and they could answer any questions that I have. Richard's is good about that too, it was just a good experience and I have a feeling I will probably go back and forth trying to figure out which lab I like better for a while.

I just sent some film to Blue Moon

2009-06-09T10:11:00.000-07:00

Last evening, I shot a roll of fujifilm 400H with the new Canon 1v. While I was shooting, I used my digital as a light meter to tell me what settings would give my film camera a nice exposure. I shot the roll to expose properly instead of overexposing like I did with that last engagement session, so we will see how it turns out. If you would like to see what I got with my digital camera, the images are posted here:
http://www.missy-cochran.com/2009/06/09/jessi/

I just got my Canon 1v!

2009-06-08T15:45:00.000-07:00

It has arrived in the mail! The film camera that is compatible with all of my EOS lenses! I just downloaded the manual at http://www.instructionsheets.com/mfg/c/canon/canon_eos_1v.pdf and I am a huge proponent of reading the manual. Read the manual, then ask questions ;) I also ordered a bunch of films to try out and will be posting my results on this blog. I will be taking it out for a test drive this evening since my little sister has offered to model for me.

I just met another local photographer pursuing film!

2009-06-05T10:40:00.000-07:00

Ryan is attending the Film is Not Dead workshop I am going to this summer and we have been emailing each other trying to set up a time to get together and chat. His wife shoots weddings with him and he is just overflowing with excitement about growing his photography business. He is totally obsessive which I can understand perfectly! Their little family came over for dinner with us last night and we BBQ ed in the rain since our power went out.

Anyway, Ryan was telling me about a local lab is trying out called Blue Moon and they are a bit more expensive than the quick stop, but they seem like they would be willing to work with him to create a profile that is just for him with results he will love every time. It would be amazing to have a local resource like this since Richards is so far away and also more spendy than Blue Moon.

I just got my pictures back from Richard's Photo Lab and Didn't LOVE then!

2009-06-03T20:53:00.000-07:00

I keep hearing all the amazing film photographers out there say that I just need to send a few rolls to Richard's Photo Lab and I will be blown away. I was hoping for just that and building it up in my mind for weeks waiting for the So. California lab to send me my proofs back. My husband won't buy my surprises for any occasion because I always build it up in my mind so much that it is always a let down when I actually get the gift. For the same reason, I didn't love the pictures. They were all right, but I was building up some magical result that is probably not very realistic. Yes, I did cry a little over the proofs that looked just a little to dingy to me. Now a week later, I can finally look at the CD they sent me of the scans. I actually like some of the scans, so I shouldn't complain any more. Also, I did call Richard's and talk to them a little while and now I feel really silly because it's the proofs I really really didn't like, but the scans are okay. Hmm. Here is the comparison between my digital work and the film images I took at the same session.

Let me know what you like better...

On this one, my film picture is blurry on the people and hard to compare with justice.

I think my digital skin tones are a little flat, but I am not totally digging the film either

I like the digital color better

I like the digital color better

I think my digital overall needs a little more red, and the film one is blurry again. I shot all the film with the Pentax 645 medium format camera I borrowed from my grandpa. All the film was shot with the Fujifilm 400H and shot aperture priority 2.8 and ISO set to 160. When I didn't love the proofs because they looked too contrasty and too saturated with color, Bill (from Richard's) suggested I shoot at ISO 400 instead of overexposing. He said that overexposing film always makes it more contrasty and more saturated.

How it all started

2009-05-28T16:38:00.001-07:00

If you want some inspiration to inspire your desire to try film, check out these guys:

Jose Villa
Elizabeth Messina
Tanja Lippert

This is how it all started for me!

Announcement: I am so excited! I just bought a bunch of film and a 35mm camera to practice all the new skills on! The word on the street is that professional film camera's last forever and rock on and on and on, so when I saw the Canon 1v film camera (which is the top of the line canon film camera that sells for about $1800 retail) on Adorama for $589 in practically new condition, I bought it!! It goes with all my Canon EOS lenses and my 580 flash system. I am so excited and scared and exhilarated about this purchase. I also bought some Fujifilm 400H, 800Z, and 1600 Neopan B&W, Kodak 3200 TMAX, and one roll of 3200 Ilford Black and White. It was all under $800 so I am happy about that.

You may wonder how I know which films to try out. Most of them I got from listening to Inside Analog Radio online. They interview a bunch of amazing film shooters and they talk about what films they use. The most common film I am hearing about is the 400H by Fujifilm. Everyone says it is so pastel and beautiful when is it overexposed a stop or two.

About

2009-05-27T15:16:00.000-07:00

Hello World, this blog is for the digital photographer wanting to learn more about film with the idea of perhaps incorporating it into your work one day. The idea of film is daunting especially when the great photographers in our day shooting film all seem to have spent at least $50,000 or more going to school to learn all this stuff. I hope that by learning on digital my learning curve will be a little faster and less costly and that your will be too.

About the author of this blog (me): My name is Missy Cochran (a Portland Oregon Wedding Photographer) and I am obsessed with photography. I can't stop thinking about it. I wish I could go on a vacation and will myself to relax 100% but I continue to ponder. I learned photography on digital but as I improve, I like my look to have the feel of film. I guess the day that I realized I would be shooting film is when it occurred to me that all my favorite photographers who I look up to for inspiration on a regular basis all shoot film. And so begins my journey. The idea for this blog is to write down and document my discoveries as I turn to film. I feel like I understand the art form of photography but I am a beginner in the medium of film.

Subscribe and read along this road of discovery.