99mallett

In 1977, I was in college majoring in Journalism with a Photography minor. I was the lead photographer and production manager for the university paper and I was assigned to attend a seminar in Chicago (240 miles away) with another staff photographer. The seminar was sponsored by Sony and GE and was supposed to cover some "ground breaking" stuff in the photography world.
There were several hundred people attending from all around the U.S. representing newspapers, magazines, and other media. We actually found the seminar to be quite entertaining... these morons started off telling us that in the future, we (photographers) would be taking pictures WITHOUT FILM! Seriously...how on earth could that be POSSIBLE? They had a "camera" as big as a small footlocker and tried to convince us that it was the predecessor to the "electronic" camera of the future... well, that was just hilarious to us. They said it would transfer the image(s) to a computer, which would be used to "print" it. Then, they had the gall to try to convince us that computers would be commonplace in the workplace and homes...keeping in mind that computers of the day were generally as big as a refrigerator, and only NASA or the IRS could afford them. Our paper was pretty much on the cutting edge of production and we used a computer (two refrigerators in size) that ran a tape with holes punched in it to print out text, which was laid out on a board for each page, so this concept was way beyond our imagination. So, here we are, 43 years later, clicking around on our laptop computers, sharing photos...taken without film on the interweb and not even reading newspapers and magazines because we get them electronically...
Crazy, huh?

savewave

Indeed!

I sat in on a presentation during the early '80s where a vendor came to the newspaper and showed us how we could edit pictures and design pages on a Macintosh 128. The guy got to the point where he was showing that you could delete files simply by dragging them to the trash can icon on the screen. The managing editor told him the whole presentation was insulting our intelligence and kicked him out of the building.

When we bought our first digital cameras some years later, they were big, bulky and expensive. I think they had a Kodak brand and the cost was in the range of $30K.

TCorzett

I highly recommend that all photographers do some film photography and film developing/printing in a darkroom. Some community colleges will have a "Basic Photography" class that includes a B&W lab component, and is a great way to do the process without having equipment/chemicals in your own darkroom. Photography with only a limited number of shots per roll, then needing to put in work to develop and print the photo... makes one think MUCH more about the process. Learning how to dodge and burn when developing... using masks, your hands, etc... gives a whole new meaning to those tools in Photoshop. Even if you only do it a few times, the process is a great eye-opener for those who have never done it before.

savewave

Makes we wonder whether I could still spool film on stainless steel reels in the dark.

99mallett

I could work wonders in the darkroom and always loved black & white FILM... I spent so many hours there that I was always comfortable developing and printing. I've never been quite so confident editing on a computer...I guess I'm more of a "hands on" kind of guy and a b/w filtered digital just doesn't have the feel of an actual print. I had a basement darkroom in our first house, but never had time or a good place for it after the early 80's...I miss it.

Cygnus

Absolutely the best teaching method.

Snowwolfe

Ansell Adams created his masterpieces in the darkroom. He fully understood the essence of photography is light.

RMVette

Growing up my dad's hobby was photography before getting in to RC airplanes in the 60's and 70's. We lived in a small home (about 1100 sq ft) and he converted the closet off the kitchen where the water heater was to a dark room. He developed his own black and white film and even had an enlarger. I remember the bottles of chemicals in the room... you probably can't buy any of that now.

My dad died in '83 and after my mom passed in took all the carousels of slides and have digitized many of them to view and send the family photo's to cousins. He always had a 35mm camera around his neck and i have one of his Pentax K1000's. Nice memories!

3D-Aircrew

I saw a video once that was describing the camera system on one of the US drones. They were using an array of hundreds of iPhone cameras optics & electronics. What the result was a "deep stare" ability so they could loiter above a city and image the whole city but the digital image stitched together produced a file that could be zoomed in incredibly close.

Sorry I couldn't find a link.

1KULC7

Ansel Adams had it right, THERE IS NOTHING LIKE USING a 8X10 Tilt and swing. I miss those days so much. From loading the plates, to developing each plate. Your 8X10 plate capture so much detail and you are right photography is capturing various exposure of light, (diffraction, absorption, or reflection) with the challenge of knowing the mechanics to manipulate and set your cameras controls to catch a primary of proof photo that can be developed and process to your desired results. For those who never used tilt and swing, it is much more complicated that in looks, and knowing that Ansel Adams, had to travel and carry this equipment though some of the roughest landscape in the west to capture what he envisions, is amazing. Sometimes he would wait for DAYS to get the perfect light. He was an amazing photographer, and in my book, Brady, Thomas, Sullivan and others do not hold a flash to Adams.

Markm10431

Something tells me if Ansel Adams had access to a Hasselblad H6D, he would not have used film

1KULC7

I can see why you made your statement, and do not know the extent of your training, experience and knowledge of photography, but I have to respectfully disagree with you and this is why.......

The 8X10 or 4x5, Tilt and Swing provides the ability of the photographer to skew the plane of focus away from the parallel in any direction. If you study Adams photographs you can plainly see how is landscapes are not parallel to the plate that took the exposure. It gives you the impression you are looking out a window and seeing the landscape as it appears his mountains and trees stand TALL upright. . Another reason the tilt and swing is so great for landscapes is the same subject is not parallel to the lens plan into near-to distant focusing, and you do not have to stop down your aperture excessively.

In simple terms, tilting is a way to gain more control over depth of field, unlike.the medium format or SLR, is limited between the lens and the focal plan not allowing you to adjust the camera to do away with wide angle fall back, you only have the f stops and speeds to control depth of field, a severe handicap for the landscapes that Mr. Adams photographed. The tilt and swing allows you by a lens through bellows to focal plane, thus allowing the shifting ability for correct of parrellexing….it will minimize distortion when you are taking wide angle photographs, of which Mr. Adams excelled, With SLRS (medium and 35mm) it is so common, unless you have an architectural correction features, you will have tilt back when you are shooting from a high or low angle, usually 35mm or below This will only HELP correct vertical line convergence (tilting buildings). and limits you to use larger apertures for low light. Also the tilt and swing allows you to have both close and far objects in focus. Rendering the results that make Mr. Adam's photographs stand out because he was a master of the tilt and swing. Considering your speed is on your film plate, you know exactly the light and what you will get, cannot do the same with any medium of 35mm camera.

SORRY, but event if the Medium or 35mm cameras were available, Mr.. Adams would not use and any fixed lens camera, range finder, twin reflex or even SLR, as you cannot achieve the same results. Mr. Adams was a master of exposures, to relation to light and speed in relation to depth of field, he acquired this skill by using the tilt and swing.

One other advantage is you have a negative that is 8X10, making processing in the lab much easier to burn and dodge and actually process the image to be true to life.

If you have never used one, chances are you will never fully understand light and exposures or fully understand why these cameras are the still on the top of the hep, and not used because of the need to fully understand and know light. I wish I could afford one, and the expense to make images, as taking portraits and landscapes that is the way to go..

proexpert

Yep.
I make engineering drawings, no paper, and these are obsolete. Who knew?