Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on May 5, 2012 10:42:03 GMT -5
That would have been too easy then ... and Roger Moore started to play James Bond in the 70s ... not 60s. It's also not Sean Connery, but as an actor ( and singer ), he is at least as famous as him, I would say.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on May 4, 2012 23:10:58 GMT -5
I know, that we had that thread somewhere, but I couldn't find it again ... cameras in movies. I thought about a little quiz, when watching an old movie from the 60s yesterday. The main character used a modified "Pentax Honeywell" with pretty deadly functions ;D Anybody in the mood for guessing, who used it and in which movie ? Berndt
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on May 4, 2012 9:13:47 GMT -5
Raining here in Tokyo
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on May 1, 2012 22:37:18 GMT -5
Nice, Roy. Thanks for sharing !!!
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 30, 2012 12:08:12 GMT -5
I can recommend, watching the movie "home", which is the best documentary on that topic, I think ( not mentioning our hobby in particular though ).
Not only educational, it's really enjoyable to watch, just from the visual aspect, containing breath taking pictures of our planet. It also focuses on a very important point: Our planet is a very complex ecological system, where everything is connected.
Very beautiful movie. I really enjoyed watching it.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 30, 2012 11:46:20 GMT -5
I always thought, that quote is from the "Rocky movies" Didn't Silvester Stalone always say it, when he got beaten up in the ring ... before winning in the end ?
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 30, 2012 1:10:23 GMT -5
Mickey, I agree with all of your beautiful words. I would just wish, that they wouldn't need to be a R.I.P. speech
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 29, 2012 9:19:27 GMT -5
Good luck, Dave !!! Wedding photography is actually much more difficult than people think. Getting all the important shots perfectly without failure ... I also never thought so in the past, but I noticed, that it is a quite difficult job.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 29, 2012 9:14:04 GMT -5
Bob is right, I think. Interesting question though. I never ever thought about this issue seriously yet, but I would definitely consider the "short lifespan" as a problem somehow. The trash mountain of electronic goods is tremendous, at least here in Japan ... and the disposal complicated. You have to pay for the disposal of bigger items like TVs, but smaller goods just go to the normal garbage, I guess. Actually a little bit pervert but an expression of our consumer society, they have huge garbage boxes here in Tokyo at the entrances of electronic or multimedia stores, filled with digital cameras and cellphones every day. Plus ... here in Japan, people do have the very bad habbit, that they never use rechargable batteries. It was really hard for me to get some and wherever I asked for it, people looked at me as if I am an alien or so. One way batteries are damn cheap here. You can get 10 for a dollar .. like umbrellas ( which is a different topic of course ). People buy them somewhere when it starts raining and when the rain stops, the streets look like that: after the rain by bokuwanihongasuki, on Flickr Disgusting, isn't it.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 28, 2012 22:33:32 GMT -5
Hahaha ... no, he really lost in in the water. We have been in this holiday together. The really tragical thing happened as a result of this happening though. He got me a new one, which supposed to be an even better model ( some other japanese brand, I am afraid, I forgot which ). The problem was, that it only had a japanese manual and I couldn't read any japanese at that time. There obviously has been a small lever inside, which needed to be switched if inserting a new film ... otherwise ... and that is, what has happened, the film will not be taken on the spool. So coming back home from my really wonderful trip to the British Virgin Islands ( really one of the last paradises on earth ), I just had a bunch of unexposed films That has been a shock !!!
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 28, 2012 22:21:17 GMT -5
I don't disagree with that, Dave ... and you said it right: A niche market. That's what film has become in general. However, there is still a demand and if Kodak will stop producing films ( what is really sad, not only regarding the Kodachrome ), others will do it instead. The obvious winner seems to be Fujifilm, because they already thought about raising their prices. Also the lomography company has released a lot of new film types during the last years. I think, they are producing app. 10 different films under their own label meanwhile.
I think, I also said it on another thread, but I think, the fall of Kodak is mainly a problem of missmanagement. They missed the chance for making people excited about film. They didn't do anything for promoting their products ( they just do it for their motion picture films ). Others, like the lomography guys, understood it better and tried to give film a "new face". Some kind of "indy touch". It's all about marketing strategies. The big guys like Canon or Nikon want to make you feel like a professional photographer if buying an expensive DSLR and those lomography guys want to make people feel like an artist if using film with a crappy toy camera. But the lomography community already became a home for just "normal" film photographers as well. They have a huge web community, where people are showing and sharing their pictures, writing reviews about films, tips for experimental photography or vintage cameras. They have a lot of competitions and exhibitions in cooporation with famous brands and magazines, publishing photo books ( like the lomo city guides ) with amazing pictures and many more things.
Visiting their website, you can read something on the top like: "In the last 24 hours there were 5,479 photos uploaded, 1,732 messages written, 994 comments made and 31,821 likes given." I would call that a lively community. The websites are provided in 24 different languages.
And what did Kodak do ? Nothing. Their homepage looks dead boring and and I haven't heard of any activities for promoting their film products ... and they are a huge company, which would have had some budget for that. Business is tough. Things need to be advertised, people need to be reached ... otherwise, you can't sell anything.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 28, 2012 9:28:46 GMT -5
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 28, 2012 9:16:28 GMT -5
Petri made good cameras. Looking forward to seeing some of the pictures, you took with it.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 28, 2012 9:09:01 GMT -5
Well, Dave ... I am not against progress or that things should move on, but it's sad, if other things need to disappear for that. I like variety. Even if we do have digital cameras now, wouldn't it be sad, if somebody would come and through all film cameras away ?
I would definitely use the Kodachrome, if it would still be around ... not always, but sometimes, for achieving a certain look, I would prefer for a certain picture. Same as cross-processing film or using other techniques.
I think, there is a longing for that ( not only in me ). You can see that in the increasing popularity of those many iPhone apps, providing some kind of vintage or "lomo" look. Many people became tired of the always same sharp and realistic look of a digital picture. What does not mean, that they wouldn't appreciate it at another time.
The magic of photography is variety - the many ways to take a picture of the same thing. One of them has been taken away from us ... and I think, it's sad ... although I can understand it ( up to a certain point ) and you explained it very well. It has been the special processing of the Kodachrome. However ... other rare films ( B/W slide film for example ) are still available ( or again ). It also requires a special way of processing and only a few labs in the world are doing it ... but they still exist and if people want to use this type of film for what reasons ever, they can use it. That's what I would have wished for the Kodachrome as well. If Kodak does not intend to produce this film ever again, why don't they "donate" the patent to some motivated indy people ? When Agfa went bankrupt, former employers refurbished the old machines ... and they are producing film again - obviously succesfully against all odds, because they still have problems to produce the pre-ordered capacity ... even though we are living in digital times now.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 28, 2012 6:52:08 GMT -5
What I like most is, that the Kodachrome could realize very vibrant colors without touching the skin tones. I think, that makes its unique and always recognizable look. If I compare the Kodachrome to ( or with ? ) two modern popular Kodak films, the Portra and E100VS, the Portra preserves excellent skin tones, but isn't really vibrant over all and on the E100VS, everything is vibrant. Therefore the Kodachrome has been quite extraordinary, I think. There is nothing like it ... not even in the digital world. I saw so many "Kodachrome emulations" and none of them came even close to the real thing.
|
|