Topslakr March 13th, 2012
I am constantly trying to evaluate what camera gear I need and what camera gear I don’t. I am in the process of selling off a considerable amount of equipment and cutting back to just the gear I like and use. I don’t consider myself a collector of camera gear so selling on unused equipment is just a matter of course for me. If I find myself leaving certain pieces of gear at home or just not taking it out of my bag when I’m out shooting, it goes. I don’t want to carry gear I don’t use and I don’t want my money tied up in gear collecting dust.
That being said, I try to have enough equipment to handle more than one situation. I am targeting three separate styles of shooting but there is a lot of overlap. Read more... (757 words, estimated 3:02 mins reading time)
Topslakr December 23rd, 2011
One of the benefits to shooting digitally is that you have a record of the settings and equipment combinations embedded into each image you make. Every time you click the shutter on your camera, be it a high end DSLR or a cheap point and shoot, the image file has what’s called EXIF data baked into it. You can look at the image and then reference the settings you used to make it, which is very helpful in learning the interactions between shutter speed, aperture and ISO. When I was learning to use my DSLR I used this information all the time and as I’ve moved over to film I have used my experience in digital shooting to help me set the camera for the image I want to make. Going forward though, I’ve begun to miss that information and as I keep trying new film types, having access to that information would be very handy. Read more... (991 words, estimated 3:58 mins reading time)
Topslakr March 4th, 2010
First, as always, the story. Scroll down for my ‘review’.
As a film shooter I’ve been struggling a lot lately with getting my images converted to digital. I have tried two scanners, the Epson Perfection V500 and the Plustek 7500i and while both get reasonably good reviews online, I was not having any luck getting quality scans from them. I’m sure it’s operator error but even at low resolutions the scans were not even half as sharp as the source film and once scanned it took me a long time to process each image to have good color and contrast (let alone getting the scanner to help clean up dust and scratches). I was getting pretty discouraged and wondering if I should really still be shooting film at all. I was looking around online and people with the same scanners as I have were getting great results that looked nothing like mine. They were all talking about curves used and a series of tweaks performed in Photoshop or other software and frankly, I’m not that kind of photographer. I want to be shooting, not processing. Lots of people love the digital end of photography but I am not one of them. I want scanning to be easy. I want to be able to press a few buttons and have scans that look.. you know.. like the film I shot. Read more... (1762 words, 5 images, estimated 7:03 mins reading time)
Topslakr March 9th, 2009
If you look around the internet you will find what almost appears to be a bit of a film renaissance. People all over the internet are adding film back into their photography. It seems people are not abandoning digital for film, they are simply adding film to how they work. While the end result between digital and film are the same, pictures, they both have various strengths and weaknesses that can and should be exploited.
Digital is really great at a lot of things and I shoot 75% of my work on my Nikon D300. You can make thousands of tweaks to the camera, change the ISO speed at any time and can see what your shots look like right now. All of these things are really beneficial and if you are a professional out shooting a wedding or a fashion shoot these features make all the difference in the world. Read more... (874 words, estimated 3:30 mins reading time)
Topslakr February 24th, 2009
When I first bought my Nikon FE I canvased a few people I know that have or do shoot film to find out what they recommend for a general use film. Something that I could use for whatever might come my way. Everyone said to look for a 400 speed film and a number of them pointed me squarely at this Fuji film. It’s a standard print film that can be handled and processed most anywhere. I bought a few 36 exposure rolls and went to town, so to speak.
I am pretty impressed with this film. It does have a healthy amount of grain to it, though it’s not distracting, and it does very well with shadow detail. Color rendition is very strong with perhaps an affinity for greens; I understand Fuji is known for that. Read more... (801 words, 4 images, estimated 3:12 mins reading time)
Topslakr December 11th, 2008
I’ve been shooting a lot of film as of late. Nothing fancy, just standard 35mm film. I have not, nor do I plan to stop shooting digital it’s just that I’ve started shooting film as well. To be honest I don’t even remember why I started shooting film, it just happened one day. I guess it was around the same time Nikon released the D3 and the D700, digital cameras with an image sensor that is the same size as a frame of 35mm film. I got to thinking about the cost of the new digital cameras, $5,000 and $3,000 respectively and I wandered around the internet looking for the cost of color film and Nikon film SLRs that could use the lenses I already own. Up until the release of those cameras all Nikon digital cameras used a image sensor that was smaller then a frame of film. In my searching found that I could get a great film camera that supported all the same lens features of my D300, for which I paid $1,800, for $100. Read more... (1186 words, estimated 4:45 mins reading time)
Topslakr August 22nd, 2008
I ordered this film to allow me to shoot in dark environments and also to capture in black and white. This is a ‘professional’ film designed to be shoot at ISO1600 but can be ‘pushed’ to ISO3200. ‘Pushing’ film means you shoot it a stop slower and then push the exposure during processing allowing you to bring out the images that are essential underexposed by a full stop. It’s a trade off in quality but the image you have it always better then the one you don’t and gaining that extra stop can make a huge difference in tricky low light situations.
My experience with this film is limited to use at ISO1600 only. When using this film with my 50mm and 85mm primes I have never been in a situation where ISO1600 was not enough. The combination of F/1.8 and ISO1600 is very good in that regard. Read more... (567 words, 3 images, estimated 2:16 mins reading time)
Topslakr August 18th, 2008
I ordered this film after I shot my three rolls of Fuji Superia 400 film as a part of my effort to take a look at a few of the more popular options in 35mm film. This was my most disappointing film to date. At first I thought that it was perhaps me who made the mistake. Perhaps I shot the film wrong or didn’t set something correctly but I looked through my images and found some Fuji Superia that I shot in the exact same way as this film. I shot one then the other at the same event. The only actual difference is I shot this film mostly with one of Nikon’s best lenses, the 14-24mm. A lens that is universally agreed to be of amazing quality.
For these images I was shooting an evening softball game in fading, but still strong light. My shutter speeds were reasonably high during the game and I was able to stop motion as well as the softball itself. I’m willing to consider the image below my fault because the sun is in frame. I have shot the 14-24 lens into the sun on my D300 and seen no problems at all but I’ll allow this one as a scratch image. Read more... (546 words, 4 images, estimated 2:11 mins reading time)