|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/28/2008
|
Oh well... I think they "support" us going all digital. ;-)
Thanks a lot for the link, Avi! Going to your friend's portfolio right now!
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/28/2008
|
Many thanks for the nice comment again, Gustavo!
Nick
|
|
|
|
Avi
{K:70138} 1/25/2008
|
No special offers :(
Hey, just in case you haven't noticed, the friend I was talking about in UF, you can check his work too : http://www.usefilm.com/photographer.asp?ID=106726
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/24/2008
|
I can imagine that very well about costs and films, Avi. Pretty much the same with me - always on search for a good offer for processing and on search for films for free, since I also have to try many many times for getting something right. But it pays back even if it is only for a stunning result now and then.
BTW, aren't there any special offers for processing around there where you live?
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Gustavo Scheverin
{K:164501} 1/24/2008
|
Excelente la perspectiva, muy adecuada la presencia de la persona pequeña al fondo de la calle.
Bravo!
|
|
|
|
|
Avi
{K:70138} 1/23/2008
|
it is because of the costs that I primarily shifted to digital.. plus, as you can probably guess, I am not very good technically - so I have to take many shots to get one perfect.. THAT approach costs a LOT when using films..
I was using films till last year.. then I shifted to digital. But I think I will shoot film some more.. thanks for all the encouragement, Nick.
Cheers 
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/22/2008
|
Great news! I would really suggest you to use (also) film cameras and B&W films, Avi, not because of any "religious beliefs" in film superiority, but simply because it works very well (for me). There are disciplines where the film doesn't even come close to digital, but there are also disciplines where digital doesn't even come close to film. It's different approaches, different aeons, with their pros and contras.
Film can hold up to 200MP on a 24*36 frame, but to tranfer that to a print or digital image... oh well! I bought the Epson perfection V700 scanner and still I am not able to scan that information from my negatives.
Analog photography demands much, perhaps too much! Its whole process is more art than it is technical, in the sense that too little knowledge can be gathered really systematically. Most of it is only trying, working, somehow "guestimating". That also means that one has to invest much more time in order to get results of the same quality as on digital. But provided one does so really stunning results are possible. Wow, do we speak about time again? ;-)
The whole situation reminds me of my own work as a guitarist in rock groups. (Oh well, it's heavy metal ;-)) I really loved digital equipment for so many years, because of ease of use and versatility - I was fanatically pro digital. But somehow and without even noticing that, that unexplainable charming thing that came out of the valves of some Marshall, or even better Laney, gradually captured me. It was not that kind of "falling in love immediately", but rather that subtle charm that wins you by the time. Now I still use many digital things around, but that roaring thing that the old Laney emits has something else, something unexplainable to me. Its pure staccato pressure, or what is it? Or it could also be that I am too oldfashioned after all! ;-)
Anyway, I'd be really glad to see you going also analog. Take that step, try your skills, your prweferences, see what you are more inclined to. I would say that B&W film catches the street best, but I am sure that also my own gusto makes me say that. As I am also sure that you will take exactly as good images, be them analog or digital.
Last but not least, Unfortunately the costs are likely higher with film. The best I could get by keeping iamge quality on good levels was about 10-20 US cents per image - and that was only some years ago using a very special offer for precessing. Now I am at about 35 US cent :-(
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Avi
{K:70138} 1/21/2008
|
Not really.. I had used one called Nova (I am not sure if you find it now) in India. In fact, I have not used Kodak CN or Ilford yet.. but another very good friend of mine, a fellow UF-er and and B&W street enthusiast suggested these to me. I have full intentions of buying some and turn back to films !!
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/21/2008
|
I was using Kodak 400 CN for a long times, and it has been a coincidense at the start, since some good friends of mine here in Switzerland work for Kodak, and they receive many too many films. So they had some 20 of them still unused and they passed them to me, which was the very start of my shots using B&W. I came to love the Kodak 400 CN for its strong contrasts and heavy grain, and I still love it, but now I try to get comfortable with Ilford PABF Plus 50 for smoother images. I'll be posting some of the shots with Ilford soon.
What other nice B&W films are still produced? Do you have any kind of favorite, despite the fact that you work digital?
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Avi
{K:70138} 1/20/2008
|
You spoke my mind about landscapes vs street.. :) .. oh, by the way, what B&W film do you use ? Kodak 400 CN ?
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/20/2008
|
Indeed it can get very hard to catch a good image out of the stree, Avi. The laughing is about the similarity of our ideas, but the street is more difficult than, say some landscape. The reasons are very obvious to me. A wonderful landscape is still a wonderful landscape no matter if you include a bit more of this and a bit less of that. It remains wonderful one or the other way, so not much of composition thoughts are necessary most of the time.
But the street... that's something different, especially in its wider angle versions. Take a tiny little bit of something in the frame and you get a completely different image. I guess that it has to do with the many sudden appearances of objects - sharp contours everywhere in contrast to nature that tends to evolve in a more continuous way in space.
That the B&W is the choise of favor most of the time on streets is obvious to me now - it wasn't as obvious when I was shooting these images some while ago. Perhaps the rather "unflashy" coloring that I was prefering at those times could be some instinctive reaction of mine towards the B&W - if we consider the transition from color to B&W images as flowing in some sense. But after some first tries in B&W I also started prefering it this way, and now I am almost only with B&W films when I get out in the streets.
As about the Leica... Sigh! Oh well, you know, achieving the most with the least means is quite mind sharpening - so said the poor man. ;-)
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Avi
{K:70138} 1/19/2008
|
I am VERY serious when it comes to street photography. B&W is the obvious choice ( I even SHOOT in B&W) .. wish I had a Leica...
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/19/2008
|
You might laugh but this was exactly my own idea, and so I'll be posting many B&W film images of this series soon, Avi.
Thanks a lot for the more than nice comment!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/19/2008
|
Well, Dave, the old lady was more luck than anything else. I was thinking about such an image with a big DoF, set up the camera, and then suddenly she came into my frame - a welcome gift of course!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/19/2008
|
Many thanks for the nice comment, Leo! I had much luck to have the old lady at that place.
Cheers,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Avi
{K:70138} 1/18/2008
|
You see what I meant ?? it is VERY Henri-ish !!!.. only, we have to do it in B&W :)
|
|
|
|
Dave Stacey
{K:150877} 1/18/2008
|
Good timing to get the pedestrian in that position, Nick, and the dof is excellent here to capture everything.
Dave.
|
|
|
|
Leo Régnier Я£
{K:67696} 1/18/2008
|
Superb capture!! Great moment!!
|
|
0 
