OT: Film cameras and photography comeback?

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pink

It's well beyond color and sharpness. With Generative AI and Generative fill in Photoshop, along with other software brands emerging, It's ridiculous what you can do to an image with just a push of a button.

It is pretty amazing, yes, and it was a big push for me to upgrade my 8 year old macbook last year.

I will add the caveat that with all of the new tools available - there is nothing truly new in them with the exception of noise reduction or upscaling. Everything that is in the new range of updates that Adobe is rolling out is stuff that could be done already but the real game changer is the ease of use. What could take an hour in photoshop is done in minutes with a few clicks. So these things are much faster and more accessible. If you havent used them, you're missing out - and anyone complaining about the cost of adobe subscription products isnt serious about producing good photography in 2024, its one of the best values going.

And just like anything else, you get out of it what you put into it, it still takes work and practice and refinement. I totally reject the idea that all of these tools and AI make good photography irrelevant, and it makes good photography more accessible to more people - perhaps at the cost of making it far harder to pay your rent with photography.

[jamesdak]

Talk about timing....

My youngest hit me up Friday and mentioned being at the DI (church thrift store) looking at an Olympus film camera. Said he wanted to try film. Bear in mind he's got my old Canon 40D as well as one of the mirrorless R camera's. Told him not to waste money buying one, just come by and we'd dig into the box of old Minolta camera's I had. I did not realize I had kept so many of my old bodies. Pretty much all the 7 series from a SRT-101 up to a Maxxum7 body.

Still have about 3/4 of these:



Basically told him that only the XD-7 and Hi-Matic 7sII were off limits. I suggested the XE-7 since that's a top end old tank of an SLR but he chose the X-7A. He went and got batteries, we put them in, and the old girl fired right up.

Now I shamefully had to dig deep back into the old brain for a couple of minutes to remember how the old beast worked but we sorted it all out. Now we'll see if the reality of cost and skill needed will set in for him after his first roll of film, LOL!

[mcteague]

Originally Posted by jamesdak

Talk about timing....

My youngest hit me up Friday and mentioned being at the DI (church thrift store) looking at an Olympus film camera. Said he wanted to try film. Bear in mind he's got my old Canon 40D as well as one of the mirrorless R camera's. Told him not to waste money buying one, just come by and we'd dig into the box of old Minolta camera's I had. I did not realize I had kept so many of my old bodies. Pretty much all the 7 series from a SRT-101 up to a Maxxum7 body.

Still have about 3/4 of these:



Basically told him that only the XD-7 and Hi-Matic 7sII were off limits. I suggested the XE-7 since that's a top end old tank of an SLR but he chose the X-7A. He went and got batteries, we put them in, and the old girl fired right up.

Now I shamefully had to dig deep back into the old brain for a couple of minutes to remember how the old beast worked but we sorted it all out. Now we'll see if the reality of cost and skill needed will set in for him after his first roll of film, LOL!

My first "real camera" was an SR-T 101. Added an SR-T 102, then the XE-7 (still my fav) and finally a used X-700. I worked in a photo store for years and that eventually burned me out.

I did go digital with a Canon G1, then a EOS Rebel and finally an EOS 5D. Today I just have an iPhone.

Tim

[nalax]

Originally Posted by mcteague

I worked in a photo store for years and that eventually burned me out.

Yes, that I found that to be true. But I recovered and am still shooting!

[Louis]

For shame, for shame! Digital photography shenanigans by the royals - can nothing be trusted?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68526972

[Mr. Pink]

What? Listen, I used to manipulate images for a living. I can't see what the problem is there.

[Louis]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pink

What? Listen, I used to manipulate images for a living. I can't see what the problem is there.

For obvious reasons those folks don't mean much at all to me, but there are two issues:

1) When the AP provides its customers images it puts its reputation on the line that the images are legitimate and unretouched. If it finds out that something it's released has been manipulated it has to retract the image.

2) It's propaganda. The Palace released the image to try to show that Kate Middleton is in improving health and recovering from surgery. If they start tweaking images for this or for that reason, then you can't trust their messages. Americans don't really care that much about the Royals, but from what I read it's super, super important to the Brits.

[merckxman]

What the Princess says,

[Alistair]

Looks like an AI edit run amok. Understandable that AP etc pulled the image.

Probably no biggie, but the conspiracy nuts will spin this all sorts of crazy ways.

[Mr. Pink]

If it had nothing to do with the damn Royals, you wouldn't have heard a thing. There's been much worse.
Here's some good example of America's royals getting similar treatment: https://www.businessinsider.com/cele...ashion-show-11

Journalism has developed some strict guardrails over manipulation. One incident that spawned these self enforced rules was the manipulation of OJ's mugshot on the cover of Time way back to make him look dark and sinister.

https://content.time.com/time/covers...940627,00.html

The best retouching is retouching you can't see, and, trust me, you see it every day. AI just put all that on steroids.

[Mr. Pink]

Now, this is how you do it, Kate.

[Alistair]

Ha! That's fantastic. How many prompts did it take to get that?

[avalonracing]

Waaaaait a second. I don't think that smoking picture is real. One of the hands doesn't look quite right.

[rice rocket]

Originally Posted by avalonracing

Waaaaait a second. I don't think that smoking picture is real. One of the hands doesn't look quite right.

Is the kid on the left smoking two joints?

[NHAero]

Originally Posted by Alistair

I bought a new-to-me film camera a few weeks ago. It's a mid-70s Olympus 35 DC. I won't be using it as my main camera (I have a pair of Olympus mirrorless bodies for that), but I think it will make a fun toy.

https://randomphoto.blogspot.com/202...e-delight.html

Film is too expensive to ever be my main photography fix. $10+ for a 36 exposure roll and another $10+ to develop/scan. Ouch.

I don't see it ever becoming a mainstream thing again. More like a niche hobby, like collecting watches or making espresso. Old cameras are engineering marvels (well, some are) and the chemistry of film/developing is easy to geek out on.

I carried the 35 RC all around Europe, India, Nepal, and East Africa for years, with passable results for a rank amateur. For a pilgrimage to Tibet in 2002 I bought a Ricoh GR1v. I loved that camera and it took wonderful photos. But I was not a film enthusiast, just someone who wanted to record these places I was in, and when digital became reliable I switched. I think I sold the Ricoh for more than it cost!

I wonder if there's a current digital camera that compares for diminutive size, fast shooting, and quality optics.