Does anyone here still use 35mm film?

I cleaned out my case and found a 9 rolls of unopened 35mm Kodak Max Versatility 400 & 800 camera film (good stuff, I think). They expired 3/2005 and 1/2006.

I don't use film anymore, so if anyone is interested in getting 9 free rolls of the film, just PM or e-mail me.

Hi,

I do, but unfortunately, I use 200 and 100 most of the time because I like the way the film catches colours. 400 and 800 don't seem to make as vibrant pictures. That film is not really too far past its date, so it shoud be still shootable.

Dillon

nah, my film camera is a very simple point and shoot...my digital camera is better...besides processing digital pictures is much cheaper than processing film.

What is 35mm? Is it something you use to hold vinyl records in place?

PM sent, I use that stuff for taking long exposure photos through my telescope......

Brad

When I do get a chance to burn a little Silver Halide, it's usually Ilford's HP5 in an old and well loved Nikon F3, then processed in the bathroom

Offer has been taken

Parker "51"s and Vacs, Sheaffer Snorkels, Nikon "F"s and Canon "A"s forever!!!

Hey - don't be down on vinyl!

In many cases it still sounds better than digital, given a capable reproduction system.

I know - the MP3 generation hasn't got a clue what sound qualisy is all about, and doesn't care.....

I still have all my film gear, but haven't shot film for several years. Can't give up old friends even though I have 2 very good digitals.

I agree! Also, many people are surprised when I mention that vinyl records are still made! Sadly they are difficult to find if you live in a smaller town--even in medium sized cities you have to know where to look to find them.

And even if your system isn't the greatest, at least you get other benefits that sometimes accompany vinyl records, such as larger album artwork. Since new vinyl records are not as available as CD, record companies often have bonus features in the vinyl releases for collectors, such as posters or various colored vinyl. (I have records that are white, pink, orange, and even some that are clear!)


As far as film, even though I prefer digital because of the ease of use and low cost, I still enjoy film from time to time, especially when I plan on making my own prints in a darkroom.

--Stephen

We still use 35mm for all of our snapshots and pictures of the kids, etc.

Simply put, it's easier. You shoot a roll, get it developed, and look at the photos. When someone comes over, you have a set of photo's to hand around, and we get duplicates so there is a set to send out to the grandparents.

We found we just never get around to looking at digitals. It requires too much time sitting in front of the computer, editing out the bad ones, getting them printed, etc. We just don't like to spend that much time in front of the computer at home (well, I do, but only for pens - if I had to add editing photos all the time on top of pen stuff, keeping the accounts up to date and other email correspondence, then I would never have time for the kids).

The worst is my father-in-law. He takes hoards of digital photos and then posts them all to one of those on-line photo-sharing sites. So to see them, we have to scroll through 400 photos. . . on a dial-up. . .

Ever hear of editing? We don't need to see 10 photos of the same thing - just post the good ones!

John

I have masses of envelopes with old pictures in them and I rarely look at THEM.

The ratio of 'keepers' to junk is very small, if you are a discriminating photographer and I could pay for the new digital camera with the cost of the film and processing I'd burn up on a reasonably long vacation.

The fact that you never get around to processing digital images on the computer but prefer to delegate that function to a film processor is a personal one - you would rather pay the freight to do it that way than spend the time doing it yourself.

I do my own processing and print out only the images that are worth keeping and handing around.

I am using a Sony R1 these days with 10 mp resolution - very nice little unit. A couple of larger memory cards and you can shoot all day in RAW.

Oh, wow, let's not get the "high end" audiophiles started! My best bud is one such. Takes an hour for the system to warm up. The listener must sit in one exact spot (the "sweet spot"). And since popular music is so "badly recorded", one must listen to high end avant garde disks like Dishpan Symphony and Dwarf Choir Gregorian Chants. I think he's into his system to the tune of about $50k now, and still upgrading (due to his wrist injury, I had to lug his 100+ pound amplifier to Fed Ex to be sent off to be re-something-or-othered (new transformers?). I think I'll stick to pens, and sweat overspending on a $50 Parker.

I have gone over entirely to 6x6 (120 roll film) in various types of Holgas, and a Yashicamat. Nice big negatives, and one can get the best of both worlds by cross-processing transparancy film, scanning the transparancies onto a CD ROM, and printing whatever prints take one's fancy. Far less immediate than a digital camera, but satisfyingly low tech (if you are the sort of person that finds low technology solutions satisfying. Toy Holgas with plasitic lenses have gained something of a cult following in recent years.

www.bottlehead.com

I don't think this qualifies as high end because the hardware doesn't cost that much to buy in hifi terms, but I have spent many winter evenings sweating under a hot soldering iron building and modifying this stuff. Enormous fun, and the sound...

100 pounds? He's a piker.

My main amps weigh about 120 pounds. Each. And that is just the top and midrange - each side also has separate bass amps.....

However - I am not a compulsive upgrader, and my system was carefully created over a decade, and hasn't changed in several years. It is about the music, not the gear.

Now if I only had time to listen to it more often.

Hahahahaha! I just know it was 100 pounds plus, dunno the exact weight. I only mentioned it to draw the rabid audiophiles, such as yourself, out of the shadows. HAHAHAHA! C'mon, come clean, confession is good for the soul, tell the people here who are only DABBLING with compulsion with fountain pens, what REAL COMPULSION is about, what with hard core, high end audiophile!!! Hmmmm, maybe like auditory crack cocaine? I can't comprehend it myself, just watch the deterioration in my best friend. Man, pens are easy, a cheap high, like Ripple and Annie Green Springs!!! High end audio is a big buck black hole spiral.

Not exactly portable then?

Good - nothing worse than being near to someone whose head is going "tish, tish, thishy, thishy, tish-tish" from itty bitty wires in their ears, all the way home.

Actually, does there come a point at which either your ears are not good enough to benefit from the hi-fi, or you start to really pick up and hear the faults in the recordings themselves?

Rather like aquiring a tast for fine malt whisky... fire-water then looses its appeal

Chris

Audio mania can have several different flavours.

One can obsessively upgrade the physical system. In Vancouver, where we have a huge Asian population, there are many ex-Hong Kong guys who suffer from audiophilia nervosa - they have to have the best and latest gear and then sit around playing about 3 audiophile recordings on it. If you want a really good deal on gear that is 6 months old, just wait for something newer and better (supposedly) to come out and some of these guys are sure to be hitting the upgrade path again.

I am not subject to that sort of mania - I just like to listen to music, and I do it in a way foreign to many people in the MP3 generation today - I sit there with no distractions, no TV going, no friends to talk to, and LISTEN. I commend it to you, it can be a marvelous experience for those of you that have an attention span longer than 3 minutes (I think that excludes anyone under the age of about 25).

And Chris - don't get me started on single malts - I probably have more than 50 different ones and can think of few things better than slowly sipping one while listening to a wee dram of Bach on the old spinning vinyl machine

Bill
(now filling up his new Classic Pens CP4 to actually USE it today!)

Bill,

The enjoyment of a fine wee dram... the sight... the smell... the complexity...
whilst listening to good music (OK I only have CDs now)...
with a fine pen and ink in hand...

Some of the great pleasures in life...

I have a few (malts, that is) but nowhere near 50! But I do have duplicates of my favourites (like Balvenie) though I miss the original The Macallan for a cold winter's afternoon. It is now all gone

Chris

50 malts makes me sound like a right dipsomaniac, doesn't it?

But I keep a single bottle going for years, it is more like a reference library than a grog shop.

I still have some nice old Macallans I got in the 80s.....

Have been working my way slowly through some interesting Bowmores, but I regret the current tendency of all distilleries to 'go yuppie' with this wood, that wood, every bloody wood, in an attempt to appeal to fickle yuppoid fancies.

It was more fun when the only malt fans were....malt fans. Before it became shi-shi to pretend an appreciation for such things. Needless to say it also drives prices crazy!

I get together with 4 other fans 3 times a year to taste maybe a dozen malts (sounds like a lot, but 1/2 oz. is a decent tasting aliquot), and that is great fun, although I do wonder what the police would say if they stopped me and saw a half dozen opened bottles in the boot....

I have used the 35mm film until recently, in my Nikon F50. I got rid of it to get a new camera, and now I am breaking my head over the Nikon D50, D70 or Canon 350D.

As for the audio, I used to construct my own amps, tubes for preamps and mosfet for power amps. Mostly Nelson Pass designs. Right now, I am listening to my NAD C320BEE, and a Marantz CD43. Oh, and a pair of JM Grande Utopia's...










i wish...

Nenad

I have to agree with the woodie thing. Far too many and too much wood.

Balvenie Founder's Reserve is my number one, but although I have several Islay malts, their pungency is still too much for my palette; they are "laid down" for my retirement

We have an annual business forum at work and I was asked to suggest some sort of entertainment. I proposed whisky tasting - and it has returned several times since, by popular request.

And yes, I still use 35mm in a Cannon (and in an Olympus Trip too). i just can't get used to squinting at a funny little screen on the back of the camera.

Chris

I use Classe DR-3 VHC monos and a couple of PSE monos for bass, fed by an Audio Reserach SP-14 - all old but valued friends. They run into Vandersteen 4As.

Chris - I almost always use the famliar small sighting port for setting up a shot, except for when I am doing close up work on a tripod, and then the larger screen is handy. Otherwise just use them like they are regular old style cameras.

Many screens have insufficient brightness for use in full sun anyway.

I agree. And if you're in a situation when you are not using a tripod, you may get better stability while using the eye port because you can brace the camera on your brow and your arms and hands are retracted toward your body. When you use the LCD viewing screen you have to hold the camera at arms length and this position is not stable which introduces a lot of camera motion.

I noticed on my friend's Nikon D50 SLR that the LCD doesn't even show the pre-shotting view (i.e. you MUST use the eye port); the LCD on that camera is ONLY for viewing the photo after you take it, as far as I can tell. with a camera that large, I think it would be very difficult to hold it out at arms length anyway and get good results.

I'm a big fan of tripods, and I even use a 2-second shutter delay if I'm worried about camera motion.

--Stephen