Author Topic: What is the most enjoyable part of photography for you? (Read 5605 times)

Late Developer · « **on:** February 23, 2017, 01:05:17 PM »

I've set this up so we can pick the 2 processes that best describe our motivations. It could be "everything", of course, but I suspect we all have our favourite bits....

jojonas~ · « **Reply #1 on:** February 23, 2017, 02:03:53 PM »

Trying out different cameras in new settings situations
and ofcourse, making prints in the darkroom

DonkeyDave · « **Reply #2 on:** February 23, 2017, 02:30:24 PM »

being alone, having my mind occupied only by the subject in hand, drifting off to 'another place'

its therapy for me

Francois · « **Reply #3 on:** February 23, 2017, 03:12:42 PM »

Counting seconds definitely takes your mind off of things.
I also love the excitement of pulling a reel from the tank and seeing that once again it actually worked!

Late Developer · « **Reply #4 on:** February 23, 2017, 04:06:44 PM »

For me, it's the combination of going to places I've never visited before (whether it's close by or the other side of the world) and taking photos that will, hopefully, transport me straight back there whenever I review them.

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #5 on:** February 23, 2017, 04:24:30 PM »

Could be or is everything indeed, but focussing on 1 option I'm with the vast majority, so far at least.

astrobeck · « **Reply #6 on:** February 23, 2017, 05:12:48 PM »

I do it because I've had a camera of some sort in my hands since I was 6, so it's part of my life.

IN truth, I like the whole process of photography, the places, the people, the darkroom... the tinkering with cameras.

Certainly not for fame or fortune. That takes the fun out of it when it's work!

Indofunk · « **Reply #7 on:** February 23, 2017, 06:13:26 PM »

My favorite part of photography is also my least favorite

I basically do it all for the feeling of throwing the film into a Paterson tank, dumping in chemicals, and seeing images come out (or not

). But it can also be the most annoying part of the process, preheating the chem bath, monitoring temps, breathing in the blix (seriously, how many years have I taken off of my life from that?)...

No wait, I lied, scanning the film is the most annoying part of the process

John Robison · « **Reply #8 on:** February 23, 2017, 07:09:22 PM »

Well, hate to admit it but.....really none of the above, not precisely anyway.
I'm a "tinkerer" or perhaps a "Tinkerer" with a capital 'T'.
I love all sorts of mechanical devices and what is one of the highest expressions of mechanical design and construction?
Old cameras of course. This also goes to the reason I lost almost all interest in cameras built after electronics became the norm in controlling shutters, etc and autofocusing came out on cameras. When the Canon T90 came out, with it's slightly 'melted, plasto blob shape' and LCD screens appeared on so many cameras I reacted with revulsion toward them. A FTb has ten times the class of a T90 and although the new cameras were quite capable, they....they...how can I put this politely, well, they just have no class at all, they are appliances that take pictures.
I'm most happy when building, repairing, modifying and tinkering with photography equipment. I like building contraptions more than using them, if that makes any sense. I have not one artistic bone in me, couldn't take a good picture except by accident.

Francois · « **Reply #9 on:** February 23, 2017, 08:44:52 PM »

Quote from: Indofunk on February 23, 2017, 06:13:26 PM

No wait, I lied, scanning the film is the most annoying part of the process

Ditto that.

Why can't anybody make a good scanner like those on the Frontier and the Pakon at a reasonable price? It's not like they are rocket science or something...

thatguychad · « **Reply #10 on:** February 23, 2017, 09:26:42 PM »

Quote from: Francois on February 23, 2017, 08:44:52 PM

Ditto that.

Why can't anybody make a good scanner like those on the Frontier and the Pakon at a reasonable price? It's not like they are rocket science or something...

Is the price of the Pakon really that far off-base? I got my F335 for $700. I think my 135+ was $250, and that was within the past two years. I think the Pakon could easily be worth what a new V700 cost...possibly more because of how it improves the worst part of the process.

Francois · « **Reply #11 on:** February 23, 2017, 10:32:25 PM »

Things have changed a lot...
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Pakon-F135-PLUS-each-one-tested-works-w-Noritsu-digital-minilabs-film-scanner-/232248535373?hash=item361317694d:g:YK4AAOxyWmxSUhHg

02Pilot · « **Reply #12 on:** February 23, 2017, 11:19:18 PM »

Someone just posted and sold (quickly) a 135+ on RFF priced at $500. I was tempted by it, but I don't shoot that much color. I've got a workflow with my flatbed that works for B&W, and I've got a PrimeFilm XA for color; the latter is slow and feels, um, delicate, but the results are decent. If I ever need a lot of color scanned, I'll pay someone to do it.

I do have to wonder why no company has yet managed to replicate the Pakon's capabilities at a reasonable price.

thatguychad · « **Reply #13 on:** February 24, 2017, 03:36:10 AM »

I wouldn't be shooting 35mm if it weren't for the Pakon. Scanning with a flatbed is far too slow and Newton rings were apparent on too many frames since not all of my negatives are perfectly flat and most holders suck (I ended up getting a Digitaliza before I bought my Pakons). It'd be worth it even at $500 for black and white for me. If you've never used one, you're missing out.

Indofunk · « **Reply #14 on:** February 24, 2017, 03:40:52 AM »

Newton's rings are my nemesis

thatguychad · « **Reply #15 on:** February 24, 2017, 03:42:43 AM »

Quote from: Indofunk on February 24, 2017, 03:40:52 AM

Newton's rings are my nemesis

Luckily, I've never seen them with a Digitaliza for my 120 films and now they're a thing of the past on 35mm with the Pakons. I don't shoot enough 4x5 to remember, but I don't think I ever had a problem with it on my old Epson 4990.

Indofunk · « **Reply #16 on:** February 24, 2017, 03:53:57 AM »

Quote from: thatguychad on February 24, 2017, 03:42:43 AM

Quote from: Indofunk on February 24, 2017, 03:40:52 AM
Newton's rings are my nemesis

Luckily, I've never seen them with a Digitaliza for my 120 films and now they're a thing of the past on 35mm with the Pakons. I don't shoot enough 4x5 to remember, but I don't think I ever had a problem with it on my old Epson 4990.

I don't get them on 120 on the V500 for whatever reason (also, I don't shoot very much 120, so I honestly wouldn't even remember if I did get them), but on 135 they rear their ugly head all so often. I'll either bypass those frames, or if I *really* want them, I'll re-press them for another day (I always press my negs overnight) and rescan.

Can the Pakon take unpressed negs? Even if they're really curly?

Bryan · « **Reply #17 on:** February 24, 2017, 04:09:20 AM »

I agree with John about tinkering with cameras but I also just love taking pictures. I enjoy taking my time to set up a shot with no sense of being rushed, that's when I usually take my best photos. I also enjoy mixing up my caffenol or beerenol and processing my film. I had never done that before I joined this forum and was inspired by other forum members. By the way, the weekend photo threads help keep me motivated. I try to have something every weekend, though it doesn't always work out that way, I think I only missed a few last year.

thatguychad · « **Reply #18 on:** February 24, 2017, 04:26:11 AM »

Quote from: Indofunk on February 24, 2017, 03:53:57 AM

Can the Pakon take unpressed negs? Even if they're really curly?

I've never had anything too curled for the Pakon, it's awesome.

Indofunk · « **Reply #19 on:** February 24, 2017, 04:31:29 AM »

Quote from: thatguychad on February 24, 2017, 04:26:11 AM

Quote from: Indofunk on February 24, 2017, 03:53:57 AM
Can the Pakon take unpressed negs? Even if they're really curly?

I've never had anything too curled for the Pakon, it's awesome.

Ok, can anyone lend me $1000 to buy a Pakon?

(and by "lend" I mean "give"

)

thatguychad · « **Reply #20 on:** February 24, 2017, 04:45:06 AM »

Quote from: Indofunk on February 24, 2017, 04:31:29 AM

Ok, can anyone lend me $1000 to buy a Pakon? (and by "lend" I mean "give" )

You can get the non-Plus version for closer to $400, but it's not as fast. Still faster than a flatbed and no Newton's rings, though.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #21 on:** February 24, 2017, 10:33:34 AM »

ohyeah planning and building cameras is a real joy too!

zapsnaps · « **Reply #22 on:** February 24, 2017, 11:05:42 AM »

~~Watching the model undress?~~

No, but really folks... It's the creative process that happens - or doesn't - with the model. Had a shoot 2 weeks ago with a model in Zurich. Looks wise, she's a marriage breaker. But there was no rapport - nothing. And it showed in the work that I took. She looked bored. I was bored. And you never know if there is going to be a spark until you meet the model. But if she gets it, if there is engagement and genuine interest in this old bloke messing around with film ("WTF?") on a camera which looks it was either liberated from a skip or stolen from a museum, then it all works out well and the results speak for themselves. Interestingly, people who look at my work can see the difference too, so it's not me imagining it.

Late Developer · « **Reply #23 on:** February 24, 2017, 11:40:52 AM »

Quote from: zapsnaps on February 24, 2017, 11:05:42 AM

~~Watching the model undress?~~

No, but really folks... It's the creative process that happens - or doesn't - with the model. Had a shoot 2 weeks ago with a model in Zurich. Looks wise, she's a marriage breaker. But there was no rapport - nothing. And it showed in the work that I took. She looked bored. I was bored. And you never know if there is going to be a spark until you meet the model. But if she gets it, if there is engagement and genuine interest in this old bloke messing around with film ("WTF?") on a camera which looks it was either liberated from a skip or stolen from a museum, then it all works out well and the results speak for themselves. Interestingly, people who look at my work can see the difference too, so it's not me imagining it.

David,

An interesting point and it's probably just as relevant for all photographic genres to a larger or lesser extent. We were in Bologna Sat to Tues (just gone) and it is a beautiful city. However, there were parts of it I was convinced would look jaw-droppingly stunning through the viewfinder but, for whatever reason, they didn't. There were other places that looked pretty mundane until viewed through the viewfinder when a combination of the light / shade, the architecture and the people milling around screamed to be photographed.

Equally, there are areas of the UK, including the area in which I live, where I find it almost impossible to "see" a decent photograph. Others have taken excellent photos in those places - so I know they exist - but, for reasons that are beyond me, I never seem to spot them.

I also find that some scenes look better (to me) "square" than "oblong" (and vice versa) and that when wandering around a city, I feel a lot more comfortable with a 35mm rangefinder than a 35mm SLR. I've tried to rationalise these things but I just end up more confused - so I just go with the flow.

Paul.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #24 on:** February 24, 2017, 03:55:54 PM »

Hi Paul
Interesting observations. Since I bought the Blad, I've started 'seeing' things square, even if I'm carrying 135 film. Being a poseur (moi?) I've also set my rectangular carry camera to square format. Now I'm seeing things that way, I hardly ever flick the switch back to 135 format. This could, perhaps, stem from preferring a long lens as a carry lens (as mentioned previously, my non-prime) 80-200, permanently set to the 80 end. Even for landscpae work, I pick out elements, rather than the entire scene, so 80-ish is a good length for that.

Late Developer · « **Reply #25 on:** February 24, 2017, 04:19:32 PM »

Quote from: zapsnaps on February 24, 2017, 03:55:54 PM

Hi Paul
Interesting observations. Since I bought the Blad, I've started 'seeing' things square, even if I'm carrying 135 film. Being a poseur (moi?) I've also set my rectangular carry camera to square format. Now I'm seeing things that way, I hardly ever flick the switch back to 135 format. This could, perhaps, stem from preferring a long lens as a carry lens (as mentioned previously, my non-prime) 80-200, permanently set to the 80 end. Even for landscpae work, I pick out elements, rather than the entire scene, so 80-ish is a good length for that.

I didn't know you'd been seduced by the square side? Nice one!! I know you don't tend to post much on here but I'd be really interested to see if / how it's altered your style. Have you updated your website with new (square) stuff?

One of my favourite lenses for my Blad is a CB60mm Distagon - it's got an angle of view similar to a 35mm and it's f3.5, so not too slow to hand-hold with 400 ISO film. I've just got some slightly out of date Portra 800 which is supposed to be beautiful for ambient light skin tones as well as landscapes.

Aksel · « **Reply #26 on:** February 27, 2017, 08:32:56 AM »

For me it´s the "how would that look in a photograph" way of seeing the world, I love how light creates shapes and changes how things feel and look. I like the idea of expressing mood and feelings trough photography, though what I feel might not come across very well to who ever is viewing my photos (if anyone, as I don´t really sharing it anywhere). That and the mechanical and physical stuff, how different gear forces me to think in a different way to overcome the limitations in the camera.

rpmdrd · « **Reply #27 on:** February 28, 2017, 09:58:23 PM »

the process, the hunt, the results overall certain aspects of it I wouldn't be good at any rate but still find that my outputs are not that bad and some photos I enjoy trashing and keeping.

chris667 · « **Reply #28 on:** February 28, 2017, 10:09:08 PM »

Making something beautiful.

I have an idea that when I'm an old man, I will have a few images I've produced hanging up on my walls.

I love the film side of it, because of the mystery.

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #29 on:** March 03, 2017, 06:55:33 PM »

My relationship with photography has changed since I started mixing with some of you good people online (first on the old Toycamera site and now, here on Filmwasters) and my answer to this question would have been very different 11 years ago. This is because my eldest child was born 11 years ago and with that my time being a photography geek came to an end (at least until the kids get a bit older and then I can spend a bit more time taking photos again). Back then I might have ticked all of the above (expect possibly printing because I've not printed since I was a kid myself), but as of now I went with the "Just taking pictures" option. Not because it's the right answer, but because it's the closest to the right answer. And what is "the right answer"? Well, it's a bit weird, but the aspect of photography I like the most these days is the moment I press the Go button. It can be when I'm taking an actual photograph, or it could just be when I'm clicking away on a camera that doesn't even have any film in it. I just like the sound of the shutter release, the magic of how it makes me feel. I don't want to think about what comes next: the processing, the scanning, the editing. Aaaargh. I have no time.

There are stories of famous photographers dying and leaving roll upon roll of exposed, but undeveloped film behind. I used to think that was crazy, but now I totally get it. I love taking photos, but I don't like (because I don't have time for) everything that comes after. But BOY do I love pressing that Go button

Miles · « **Reply #30 on:** March 05, 2017, 02:54:14 PM »

Monkeying about with crap old cameras and crap old film, and then being in the darkroom for ages with 6 Music on and Monkeying about with crap old paper.

charles binns · « **Reply #31 on:** March 05, 2017, 04:59:48 PM »

Buying a brand new digital camera. With lots of megapixels.

Indofunk · « **Reply #32 on:** March 06, 2017, 03:21:35 AM »

Quote from: charles binns on March 05, 2017, 04:59:48 PM

Buying a brand new digital camera. With lots of megapixels.

BANNED!!

Miller · « **Reply #33 on:** April 21, 2017, 01:18:45 PM »

Finding the time to do some would be the best part...

Anyway, I have a plan to get back on board... Hey, at least I remembered my log-in.

gsgary · « **Reply #34 on:** April 21, 2017, 02:35:34 PM »

Quote from: Francois on February 23, 2017, 08:44:52 PM

Quote from: Indofunk on February 23, 2017, 06:13:26 PM
No wait, I lied, scanning the film is the most annoying part of the process
Ditto that.

Why can't anybody make a good scanner like those on the Frontier and the Pakon at a reasonable price? It's not like they are rocket science or something...

Hassleblad make a good scanner

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

jojonas~ · « **Reply #35 on:** April 21, 2017, 02:40:42 PM »

Quote from: gsgary on April 21, 2017, 02:35:34 PM

Quote from: Francois on February 23, 2017, 08:44:52 PM
Quote from: Indofunk on February 23, 2017, 06:13:26 PM
No wait, I lied, scanning the film is the most annoying part of the process
Ditto that.

Why can't anybody make a good scanner like those on the Frontier and the Pakon at a reasonable price? It's not like they are rocket science or something...
Hassleblad make a good scanner

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

flextight is a good enough scanner but reasonable price? I dunno. well, not in my price range anyway

Quote from: Miller on April 21, 2017, 01:18:45 PM

Finding the time to do some would be the best part...

Anyway, I have a plan to get back on board... Hey, at least I remembered my log-in.

welcome back, miller!

gsgary · « **Reply #36 on:** April 21, 2017, 02:41:40 PM »

Quote from: jojonas~ on April 21, 2017, 02:40:42 PM

Quote from: gsgary on April 21, 2017, 02:35:34 PM
Quote from: Francois on February 23, 2017, 08:44:52 PM
Quote from: Indofunk on February 23, 2017, 06:13:26 PM
No wait, I lied, scanning the film is the most annoying part of the process
Ditto that.

Why can't anybody make a good scanner like those on the Frontier and the Pakon at a reasonable price? It's not like they are rocket science or something...
Hassleblad make a good scanner

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

flextight is a good enough scanner but reasonable price? I dunno. well, not in my price range anyway

Quote from: Miller on April 21, 2017, 01:18:45 PM
Finding the time to do some would be the best part...

Anyway, I have a plan to get back on board... Hey, at least I remembered my log-in.
welcome back, miller!

Don't you think £18,000 is reasonable

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

Late Developer · « **Reply #37 on:** April 21, 2017, 02:44:35 PM »

Quote from: Miller on April 21, 2017, 01:18:45 PM

Finding the time to do some would be the best part...

Anyway, I have a plan to get back on board... Hey, at least I remembered my log-in.

Great to hear from you, mate.

Poll

I've often wondered what it is about photography that makes us want to keep doing it.

Author Topic: What is the most enjoyable part of photography for you? (Read 5605 times)