I am going to indulge myself with yet another post about Craigslist and my latest medium format camera. I am, after all, a very self indulgent person.
I was thinking about eBay or buying second hand from a reputable camera store like keh.com (of course, it's going to be used as the camera has been out of production since 1986). But I have a strong death instinct so I branched out to seek ways that allow me to live dangerously like meeting online stranger face to face. Craigslist strongly cautions any dealings involve checks, money order, wire transfer, basically, anything other than a face to face cash transaction. But I broke all the rules. I sent a personal check to a seller located in Connecticut, a definite no-no. But I did it anyway with full or blind faith that the seller is just as honest as myself and at the same time fully aware that he could have just kept the money without sending me anything at all. Well it turns out that the seller is a good guy just like me. I got the camera in UPS today and everything is as described, and the package is nicely packed. It's as good as new considering the seller actually bought it on March 25, 1978, more than thirty years ago. He told me he probably ran 15 rolls with it in all these 30 years. I already bought 39 rolls.
After I got the camera, I loaded it with a roll of Kodak NC 160, and started shooting already.... It definitely takes some time to get used to, just like looking at things in the rear mirror, except the left is now right on the focusing screen. But I guess I will manage. The battery for the built-in light meter is missing so I have to guess estimate the f-stop and shutter speed combination, like what Cartier Bresson did with his Leica (note: again I am shamelessly comparing myself with some seriously famous dead photographer).
Again, I am not a real photographer, I talk about it more than I actually do it. That needs to change.
NOTE: A lot of my readers think that I am going back to analog. There is no going "back," I always like analog even I shoot digital most of the time. So if you plan to send me all the digital goodies like D3 or D700 or D300, please still do, I love digital, basically, anything that's meticulously crafted, digital or analog.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
LG just up the ante by introducing its own touch screen cellphone a week after Apple made the iPhone announcement. The PRADA phone is a col...
-
New York City is falling apart .... Buildings are collapsing , the financial market is in a tailspin and the dollar is not the dollar it us...
Glad your decision of so-called living on the edge paid off :)
ReplyDeleteWhere do you get your old-fashioned rolls of film developed then? Do you have your own dark room? Film developers in Ireland have stopped selling old-fashioned films for quite a long time now and it's getting harder and harder to find one that actually develops them these days (most have gone digital and you bring your memory stick or memory card).
Or, btw, you may like this idea here from Julie K in Taiwan of shooting digital through an old lens. The effect is really something! http://juliekintaiwan.wordpress.com/2008/06/27/through-the-viewfinder-tvf/
Don't try it at home, though, because you never know who's on the other side of the email address. I could have just easily lost my money.
ReplyDeleteIt's not going to be convenient to process 120 film, the medium format can't be all that popular but I am in NYC, so that shouldn't be a big problem. The big problem is it probably going to cost me to develop and print, there's no Craigslist or eBay of developing and printing, duh.... The idea of developing my own film does come across my mind. At least maybe just developing B/W, not printing it. Just develop the negative then scan it myself.
The picture at Julie K's website was indeed very good. It just goes to show, the camera doesn't matter. She's good at what she does. I think you misled me somewhat or I just misunderstood. Basically she shoots a regular picture, like her son, using whatever digital cam she has. Then she got another picture, from flickr that was just a picture of a dirty view finder or for that purpose can be anything that's transparent and with dirt or grit on it, it can be a picture of old view finder of course. Since she doesn't have any old view finder she can shoot so she just used whatever people uploaded at flickr. Then she combines the two pictures or what Photoshop calls layers together and of course more manipulations and makes the product more interesting, more gritty just looking like viewing it from an old view finder of a yesteryear camera. When you said "shooting digital through an old lens" I thought hey I did that all the time. Then I read her post and the flickr group I realized what's that all about.
Just got back from a BBQ.
Sorry I was not reading Julie's post properly before I commented! It's a bit disappointing to learn that the effect is really just photoshopping... Although I still haven't read the Flickr discussions, I thought the image that Julie shot came out just beautifully grainy, and I didn't think it was down to a "dirty lens" because I didn't think it was grime per se that created the grainy effect, especially not one that makes an image evenly grainy?
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I understood Julie took a short cut via Photoshop to achieve what in her words would have been achievable if one "shoots digital through an old lens"... and if that's what you've been doing this whole time... perhaps your old lens is just way too good and maybe what you really need is an old AND crappy lens so that the light is not captured properly and the image comes out grainy??? (Obviously I have no clue what I'm talking about...).
Anyway, can't wait to see the results of your B/W pictures if you're indeed attempting to develop them yourself.