Going Back to Film

[smtan24]

I just curious how many out have though of going back to film. I know I have, but I was told that developing film has gone up.

 

[denniskee]

i just develop 3 rools of negative at KT last week without print. $9 in total if i remember correctly.

 

[smtan24]

i just develop 3 rools of negative at KT last week without print. $9 in total if i remember correctly.

Do you remeber what they charged before?

 

[kiwi2]

For the convenience of digital and its sophistication, no way I'm going back to films! Films pretty much dead for me. Love digital.

 

[Stoned]

Do you remeber what they charged before?

Based on what I remember, standard rates for C41 processing used to be between 2 plus to $3 per roll for developing only. E6 processing used to be $4.50 at Ruby photo. I don't know how much everything is now, I haven't touched film in close to 7 months.

 

[student]

Going back to film?

Never left it!

I still prefer to receive hand-written letters than those printed with laserjets.

 

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

Going back to film?

Never left it!

I still prefer to receive hand-written letters than those printed with laserjets.

doc, can scan & let me see your handwriting? ;p

 

[Wisp]

From digital to film here...

 

[Paul_Yeo]

i am digitised liao - digital disc, digital piano, digital phone, digital camera, digital money

 

[csisfun]

I ditched digital for film - and only black and white film at that. It's way more "authentic" than digital B&W - and I can try lots of interesting stuff - like Medium Format for cheap.

 

[clubgrit]

I have both now, and I use either one depending on situation. I find it more challenging to use film and I use it for special shots. Fast-pace stuff, I use digital. Digital gets more use of course, but when the film is used, great satisfaction.

 

[nemesis32]

Do you remeber what they charged before?

think used to be $2/roll at most places for just negatives.

 

[antitrust]

went from consumer digital P&S to analog SLR. digital can't beat film. besides the fact that analog SLRs are only a fraction of the cost of dSLR, they give a very different feel from the time you're shooting your subject, to the time you get your prints.

furthermore, less PS to do with film (if you do scan your negs).

for work wise, i think digital is the way to go. for hobby, definitely film.. cos digital sucks.

 

[Benji77]

been with film and will never leave it.
will still get digital, but film will always be main love.

the feel of the shutter, the loading, the wait for the developing.
the full, ultimate control of the cam (esp with full manual) is much easier
to adjust the f/stop, shutter than using a digital (to me lah)

but the truth is that digital has its advantages and we should embrace both
so as to fully enjoy art.

 

[reno77]

I feel like using film but find I have no time to develop it (MF film). I dont develop my digital shots either. Just snap auto adjust and sharpen and upload online.

 

[denniskee]

just develope slides at KT, 2 rolls $14.

 

[csisfun]

35mm slides? I called them and I heard that 120 slides are cheaper. Not logical, but that was what I heard. :S

 

[antitrust]

yup. even pro negs are cheaper.

Fuji Pro 160S is only $4.50 per roll and Kodak Etakchrome 100 is only $4.70.

 

[gohaj]

Fuji Velvia 100 (not 100F) is ex. $11.50 ~ $12.00 per roll

 

[denniskee]

me use dslr when dont need wide angle (28mm and below) and normal shoot.

me use film when need wide angle and shoot more interesting landscape and building (like this cheaper than buying ff dslr).