Learning film photography - Page 4

leica's are a terrible choice for photojournalism today. only use for it is in nostalgia

Very interesting read, thanks for sharing.
I have re-discovered André Kertész work through two recent exhibitions in Paris, one in the Musée du Jeu de Paume dedicated to Kertész himself, and the other at the Mondrian/De Stijl exhibition in the centre Georges Pompidou museum.
I never realized he had been that prolific, I only wish I could be that good at "instinct" framing...
!luc

Only shoot film exclusively if you can print it yourself (at least until you're accomplished enough to tell a master printer what to do). Don't tell yourself you'll buy a scanner and scan it all in yourself and work from there and make inkjet prints of your own work. You won't. Scanning is torture, and you're most likely going to get a 'digital'-looking image out of the process anyway.

re: going pro. Fool's errand at this stage - almost every part of the pro photo biz is in decline, either losing money in the budget (daily photojournalism) or losing jobs to soccer moms with cameras (child/graduation portraiture) or losing jobs to amateurs with 16MP digicams (advertising, etc.). And if not losing jobs, having rates cut or stagnate.
Even wedding photographers are crunched more than in the old days because couples want images they can have printed themselves, rather than pay the photographer's print price.

Get your degree in photography if you want to teach with an MFA, if you want pursue it as an artform knowing you'll be poor, etc.. Don't do it banking on making a steady paycheck - the amount of work you'd have to put in to equal a solid white-collar job is crazy.

Not gonna read through this, but try to find an older community college. Most still have film developing rooms with equipment. Most are getting rid of these as they move to digital. I took a Photo class at a community college last year, and the college was built in the 50's but unfortunately they changed the film room to a class room.

Anyone shoot with a yaschica t4 super?
Been my goto p/s lately and have been getting some great shots with it. Highly recommend!

i was using a medium format (kiev 88cm) but found out rather quickly that not many places near me developed the film. black and white could be done at home but certainly not color--at least not worth the trouble, to me. i then used a fixed-lens minolta 7s for some time, i liked it a lot esp. for b&w but it wasn't modular enough, obviously, though the rangefinder is really cool so i still have it around. now using mostly the olympus om-1(n) which is the last iteration of the fully-manual OM line as far as i know. i have a few lenses for (not as many as for the Kiev, got an cabbage-scented arsenal of Arsenal and more for that one). i find that using fully-manual device really forces me into considering a whole lot more than even using a digital on "M" mode as suggested earlier. you have to do everything yourself. While my pictures started out pretty generic if not plain bad, and there was a financial loss involved, the absence of "instant gratification" kept me enthused by the whole process--taking down a description of all the settings and the shot and then trying to imagine what it would all look like once processed. then a while later, success or not, i got to hold in my hand what my creative thoughts tried to materialize. anyway, fun process, and Sebastiao's work was a nice inspiration http://www.amazon.com/Africa-Sebasti.../dp/3822856215

developing color film (neg or chrome) is minimally more difficult to develop at home. the only thing you really need is a good thermometer to nail the developer's temperature, i.e. kodak process thermometer type 3.

in contrast to bw, using kitchen gloves during development and taking steps to preserve chemistry are mandatory, as opposed to optional (but recommended).

I shoot fairly regularly (see my sig), getting the basics down is absurdly easy. Almost any of the basic how-to books can teach you exposure and composition.

If you can grasp the concept that you can fill a bucket faster with a fire hose than an eyedropper, youve got 90% of the exposure basics down. If you can understand shallow versus deep, youve got depth of field conquered.

As for composition, shoot, shoot, shoot-- and then edit yourself ruthlessly.

Do many people still use film? I was in that generation of people who learned on film right before everything went digital, I still don't really bother with digital. I can't imagine shooting film without a darkroom.

There are already some good suggestions here (as well as the usual misinformation). As I read this thread, both AY (Andre) and Luc posit valid points. And I will absolutely concur: a Leica rangefinder will NOT by itself make anyone a better photographer, in film or digital. If this is about acquiring status symbols there is no point in the discussion.

I will take the OP's original requests (and not the inevitable and somewhat ridiculous film v. digital debate) as the basis for my suggestions.
The OP would like to:
1) Learn film photography.
2) Become proficient at composition.

Re:
1):
Learning film photography requires understanding and then controlling/manipulating the relationships between film, exposure, and chemistry, whether in b&w or color, otherwise too many variables will constantly affect the results. Given that, a good home or rented darkroom or a high-quality developing lab (what milosz already stated) are requirements. Otherwise, one simply cannot control the various film/developer/temperature/water/etc. etc. variables.

I believe starting in b&w is easier (technically, color film is very easy to develop, but there are other issues, such as paper + color enlarger, etc.). It also eliminates the color variable in composition, if one can learn to visualize.
Choose one film, choose one developer, choose one exposure system. And work from that, at least for the first 6 months.
I.E.: Kodak Tri-X; Kodak D-76; Zone System exposure. This is only one of many basic aggregations, but it is time-proven.
The Ansel Adams (many: "Basic Techniques..." or the film and printing "Zone System" books); White/Zakia/Lorenz ("The New Zone System Manual"); Picker ("Zone VI Workshop"); and Stone ("Darkroom Dynamics") are all good starting points.
Learn to understand the balance between film characteristics (toe, mid-range, heel); developer (time and temp.) and exposure system.

Re:
2):
This is trickier. What is "good" composition? One needs to practice, practice, practice, and look (study), look (study), look (study) at a lot of previous photography.

No camera per se will make one a better composer, and much depends on one's own vision, but in my opinion if one doesn't develop a relationship with the viewfinder any exercise will be almost fruitless. Given the OP's desires, I would suggest of course studying the great street photgraphers, some already mentioned here (since the OP is shooting in 35 mm) and ensuring that his camera has a good, luminous, 100% viewfinder. But, mainly, try different approaches (simple or complex division of field, no horizon, field edge information, etc.). Study the great painters as well.

That said, however, the best exercises in developing photographic composition skills most quickly often come from using a view camera. The camera is stable, on a tripod. Precision adjustments are possible. The images are often static, such as landscapes. The image on the ground glass is very large but is also upside down and reversed; therefore the visual concentration required to compose is both easier to see (esp. edge of frame) but visual elasticity is also required, until composition becomes second nature. And if one then thinks view camera photographers can't shoot in the street, just look at Stephen Shore, Max Yavno, Walker Evans, Paul Strand, etc.

Whatever you do, don't use the zoom lens.

For both film practice and composition, yes, a course is a very good option, if the teacher is good. In any case, learning will require lots of practice, patience, and precision.

Yes, many photographers still shoot film, then scan, correct and print digitally.

See my friend's excellent work here.

I've heard the T4 is fantastic. I'd love to add it to my film roster very soon. I just recently got into film after a long time shooting with my DSLR. I find that you have to be really specific with your shots (after all, you only have x amount of exposures). I grabbed an Olympus Stylus Epic MJU-II off eBay for $40, but messed up my first roll because I didn't know about light leaks. Regardless, I'm having a great time. My dad has both Nikon F4 and F5, but can't seem to part with them. I usually develop at Walgreens, but if anybody has a better recommendation on NYC places to get film developed, I'd love to hear them. PS - Don't get a zoom film camera. Go for a fixed, if possible. I decided on a Stylus Epic (P&S) because I wanted to test out the waters. It looks like I'll jump into manual soon.