35mm film: Am I crazy?

[SKG]

Hi all.

I have been experimenting with motorsport photography with a 35mm film camera.

I have been using this format because I find it fun. Half the photos I take are barely in focus, some are over or underexposed, and some are totally unusable.

Perfect sharpness is something that I can never hope to achieve with the equipment currently available to me, and I have realised this isn't always needed.

I am still a novice, having taken about only 140 photos across the past year, and I was wondering if anyone on this forum with experience of shooting motorsport on film in the past could offer any advice, comments, critique?

For DSLR users, am I crazy? At race weekends I can't remember seeing anyone else with a film camera, and people have a little fright when they hear the *clunk* from my camera's shutter.

A few samples below, more at the link, most recently the Britcar 24hr. Any thoughts welcome!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/125493671@N07/

Sam.

[andrewc]

I occasionally see people using film cameras at circuits. They usually have beards.

Saying that, theres no reason why not, the settings don't really change - however you're stuck with whatever film you've chosen and can't up the iso when the clouds roll in, and of course you can't experiment in the same way as you don't have instant feedback and every shot costs you money.

[Tim Falce]

and you cant compensate for fluorescent light without filters.
Film seems to be making a comeback though so if you enjoy it why not. What camera are you using?

[SKG]

Originally Posted by andrewc

I occasionally see people using film cameras at circuits. They usually have beards.

Saying that, theres no reason why not, the settings don't really change - however you're stuck with whatever film you've chosen and can't up the iso when the clouds roll in, and of course you can't experiment in the same way as you don't have instant feedback and every shot costs you money.

I'm bucking the beard-trend, apparently.

I am still experimenting with different films and settings, so at this stage I'm not too worried about changes in lighting. Similarly, I'm not worried about instant feedback, I genuinely look forward to seeing the results a few days later, especially when you've forgotten which photos you've actually taken.

Originally Posted by Tim Falce

and you cant compensate for fluorescent light without filters.
Film seems to be making a comeback though so if you enjoy it why not. What camera are you using?

A super-budget Pentax P30T. A cheap camera means more money for film and development!

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by SKG

I'm bucking the beard-trend, apparently.

I am still experimenting with different films and settings, so at this stage I'm not too worried about changes in lighting. Similarly, I'm not worried about instant feedback, I genuinely look forward to seeing the results a few days later, especially when you've forgotten which photos you've actually taken.



A super-budget Pentax P30T. A cheap camera means more money for film and development!

Give some Kodachrome slide film a try if you have good light.
Edited, you can get it in 200ASA now so good light isn't a necessity.

[GORDON STREETER]

If you want to stick at 35mm then I suggest that you invest in a top of the range camera and lenses as there are loads for sale as they are obsolete.
Most people that have been into photography for years have lots of very expensive cameras collecting dust me included that in today's terms would have(and did) cost thousands then.
There are loads for sale on ebay for sale for virtually nothing as people would rather get a couple of bob for them than throw them away and lenses that unfortunately won't fit and work with digi bodies.
What it will make you do is think more into how to use a camera properly as every shot is costing money to develop and print and make you a better photographer !

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by andrewc

Saying that, theres no reason why not, the settings don't really change - however you're stuck with whatever film you've chosen and can't up the iso when the clouds roll in

I know I'm old but we used to up the iso if there wasn't enough light for something important and overdevelop the film to compensate.
However it was all time and money consuming and it was amazing how quick digi killed film, rather like vinyl and CDs being replaced by tiny mp3 / memory sticks and bluetooth devices, and as for smartphones !!!!!

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

I know I'm old but we used to up the iso if there wasn't enough light for something important and overdevelop the film to compensate.

I used to push ASA400 film to 2000 or even more to shoot amateur dramatics performances. Also sometimes pushed ASA100 E6 process slide film (fujichrome I think, may well not be available anymore, I wouldn't know) to very high speeds for certain types of landscape shots precisely to enhance the grain and give a moody effect on misty mornings, it was a great combination because pushing the film increases the contrast but this worked well as on misty mornings everything in the subject was actually very low contrast, especially as none of these shots included the sky.

I used to process the film myself and exactly how much I extended development I can't remember although I don't think it was ever double the time or anything like that, just a few extra minutes on a development time of around 6 minutes.

Like most I now only shoot digital, and I don't take that anywhere near as seriously as in my younger years with film.

In answer to OP's question; no it's not crazy, film is really interesting and it has lots of hidden quirkes that make photography really interesting and creative which digital cameras don't have.

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

If you want to stick at 35mm then I suggest that you invest in a top of the range camera and lenses as there are loads for sale as they are obsolete.
Most people that have been into photography for years have lots of very expensive cameras collecting dust me included that in today's terms would have(and did) cost thousands then.
There are loads for sale on ebay for sale for virtually nothing as people would rather get a couple of bob for them than throw them away and lenses that unfortunately won't fit and work with digi bodies.
What it will make you do is think more into how to use a camera properly as every shot is costing money to develop and print and make you a better photographer !

Exactly this, I've still got my old Canon A1 although these still seem to fetch more than I paid for it in 1979, the worst thing I did was sell the 70-210 f4 zoom I had for it, I didn't realise at the time that the later lenses were f4-f5.6 but were the same price. I've also upgraded my latest digi Nikon and ended up with a zoom lens (Nikon mount has never changed) without motor that is worthless so there are bargains to be had.
I've also got all my old printing gear, my £400 colour enlarger that has seen virtually no use now seem to be fetching the princely sum of about £11 on ebay so It'll stay in my loft until I croak no doubt.

[GORDON STREETER]

As I said the other week Tim I took my top of the range colour enlarger (16x20 on the baseboard) to the tip as it was in the way and was probably not worth trying to sell it as I hadn't used it for at least 20 years and can use the PC to print up to A4, also I have access to a top of the range laser printer for anything bigger.
I have still got a daylight developing tank and I suppose I could still develop a film and use the PC to reverse the negs and store/print them, but everything is soo much quicker and easier now. also how many people bother to have prints done these days with the advent of all the digi media that we can view it on ?
In the last few weeks Sue has been going through thousands of negs and prints that are taking up loads of space and chucking a lot of them out that are meaningless to us today.

[VIVA GT]

I too have thousands (literally) of 35mm slides containing Racing & Rallying mostly from the 70's & 80's.
Back in those days the boys would all get together with a few beers & have a motorsports slide night! (We had to make our own entertainment in those days.)
I sold my projector on Ebay last year for £15.00 as I couldn't bear to throw it away, and now have a scanner that can also scan slides (it has its own lightbox). All I need now is for my wife to go away on holiday for a couple of months (but leave me plenty of microwave meals in the freezer) so I can scan & save the blighters!

[GORDON STREETER]

I could have wrote your post Viva, but I still have a slide projector

[SKG]

Well, the adventure continued with Ilford HP5+ at the Belgian Grand Prix weekend...

If you want to see more from the weekend, look no further.. https://www.flickr.com/photos/125493...57656143658543

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by SKG

Well, the adventure continued with Ilford HP5+ at the Belgian Grand Prix weekend...

If you want to see more from the weekend, look no further.. https://www.flickr.com/photos/125493...57656143658543

The HP5 we used to use was B&W ?

[rwintle]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

The HP5 we used to use was B&W ?

It still is, it's just grown a "+" after it now. Still a fine B&W film, easily pushed a couple of stops.

Mad props to SKG for shooting film at the races, why not? But as Gordon alludes to - what's the colour film you're using here?

Richard (who has been known to shoot medium format film in a 1937 TLR... at the track)

[SKG]

Originally Posted by rwintle

It still is, it's just grown a "+" after it now. Still a fine B&W film, easily pushed a couple of stops.

Mad props to SKG for shooting film at the races, why not? But as Gordon alludes to - what's the colour film you're using here?

Richard (who has been known to shoot medium format film in a 1937 TLR... at the track)

Oops, apologies, the colour film is only some Fuji superia 400 I had lying around. I am glad you like the photos, there are a few more to come, once I finish the roll.