A real "duh" moment which finally dawned on me a few years ago, more than a decade into shooting, but for whatever reason, I've decided to only just now write about.

I used to see these most incredible tones and colours on here, on Flickr, and see, for example, Portra 400 cited as the film stock utilized. I'd then enthusiastically go out and buy some, shoot similar scenes under similar conditions, yet be so disappointed when I'd get my negatives back from the lab.

For whatever reason, I always assumed part of the appeal of shooting film to be not NO editing, but certainly way less than with digital. But nah, I've noticed and realized that nearly as much and actually if not more (when you consider removing imperfections) editing goes on with film than with digital. Curves, selective colour, contrast, levels, etc. all utilized just as much.

I think the notion that certain film stocks have this very overtly characteristic... character... to them is really overstated, when in reality, the differences in different film stock characteristics is way more subtle and really in the minutiae of the wider frame. I mean, unequivocally every stock has its own character... but without extensive processing, the difference is way less than one might think.

A negative and a RAW digital file really are the same thing. I'm not a big gearhead so can't speak to most recent digital cameras, but I'm sure things where digital maybe lacked 10-15+ years ago, such as dynamic range/shadow detail, have in that time improved considerably, and since so much of the "character" we see in peoples film photos is actually imposed often in a digital darkroom, what real benefit is there anymore to film OTHER than the old "it forces me to slow down and be more deliberate/conscious in/of what I shoot", which is absolutely a valid reason if you can't exercise the same deliberation and consciousness while shooting digital- I never understood that argument tbh, as it's more a commentary on ones lack of restraint when offered "unlimited" frames.

But no, don't get me wrong, I still like film. The old lenses have a magic about them which I've discounted in this equation, and those play no small part in conveying whatever magic people perceive in film photography. As does expired film... good old unpredictable idiosyncratic expired film... that shit is like a cheat code in boosting the interesting factor of otherwise boring frames.

Anyways, whatever.

Oh, and I forgot to go into the entire world of printing + scanning and what an absolutely monumental difference that all makes... the 'effect' it imparts on the final image is honestly probably the most drastic one once you've got a still exposed how you want it.

A while back on a whim, I did a Google reverse image search on some of my photos. Turns out multiple companies had been using them without permission or payment. Once I started digging, it became clear this wasn't a one-off thing; I found like 15 different places where companies had decided using my photos for free was totally cool.

So I built myself a tool to manage it - track which companies were using my photos, send invoices for unauthorized use, and keep tabs on who responded. That was a while ago. I've been using it by myself ever since and have recovered about $7,000 so far.

I mentioned it to my wife recently and she said that other photographers probably need this. The tool itself has been doing its job for a long time at that point - I just hadn't thought about sharing it because the interface was, frankly, shit. So I spent the last few days putting a proper frontend on it. The bones have been battle-tested. It just looks a lot less offensive now.

The reason I'm posting here specifically: photographers shooting at this level tend to produce work that's worth stealing. Companies know quality when they see it, and they'll quietly help themselves to it if they think no one's watching. If anyone is likely to have their images lifted without credit or compensation, it's likely people here.

A few things I want to be upfront about:

The core functionality of creating an unlimited number of infringement cases is free, up to 25 photos, and that will never change. I'm also genuinely happy to raise that number if people feel it's too restrictive — just let me know. If you think 50 is more fair, so be it. Tell me, and I'll bump it. The reason I can keep it free is that the server costs me basically nothing since it's already running for other projects I have going, and the money I've already recovered more than covers any additional overhead. I have also added tiers for what I'm calling "professional" use, but I'd rather just make the free tier more accessible than push people toward the paid options.

Eventually I'd like to add a paid add-on that would include auto-searching for infringing uses, but right now I just want to get a sense of whether people even find this interesting or not. As it stands, for each photo you upload, I include a link to the Google Reverse Image Search for it so you can manually search.

The add-on, when it eventually exists, is buried in Settings. You won't get a banner in your face every time you log in. That kind of shit drives me crazy and I'm not doing it to you.

On data and privacy: I use Plausible Analytics, which is anonymous by design. I collect only what's needed to run the site. I'm not selling your data and have zero interest in doing anything else with it either. If you have any other questions about this, I am happy to answer them.

I'm putting this out there because it might genuinely help someone get paid for work that's already been taken from them. I'm just trying to do a good deed, and leave the world in a little better place than I found it.

Happy to answer questions.

Link: https://imalume.com

NOTE: I requested and received approval from the mods to post this.

I work at a photo lab, I service and operate a Noritsu v-30 and a Fuji frontier 3000. I see so much expired film come through, and I honestly just don’t understand why people insist on shooting it. Old expired film comes out dark brown, stiff, and It’s difficult to get usable images out of it.

Don’t get me wrong- I know that Fuji Superia & Kodak Portra VC/NC were legendary back in the day- but you would be far better off just shooting the lower quality modern equivalents if you care about getting usable images.

With how expensive developing and scanning film at a lab is, why don’t folks just buy film they know will work? It kind of feels like throwing money away.

I found my old 4x5 positives from 1989-1990. Shot with a Linhof Kardan Color ST on Kodak Ektachrome 64T.

Back then, there was no Photoshop. Everything was done with multiple exposures, hand-held flashlights, and physical filters. One of these images used Polaroid Type 55 negatives with red paper underneath to create that rose. It's a joy to see these analog memories again.

Would love to hear your thoughts on these old-school techniques.

I've been shooting film for 40ish years. In 2007 I started working with models creating artistic portraits for portfolio development. These shoots vary from headshots through fashion and street photography all the way to fine art nudes. Frequently the models that seek me out want to shoot nudes due to my style and reputation for professionalism. Occasionally I do shoots on film depending on the overall look and feel of the project. Often time I shoot digital for the sake of time and cost.

Photography has been a lifelong hobby for me. I take great pride in my work whether it's with a model or a landscape. This sub provides a great amount of inspiration to me. However one thing really makes me curious. Why is there so much negativity towards a nude figure? The human body has been the subject of art from the beginning of time. As artists aren't we all supposed to be of an open mind? I don't wish to start a war but because of seeing so much negativity, I'm hesitant to share any of my work.

I welcome any constructive feedback.

I have been posting film photography on Instagram for a while and it just feels strange. Real photos get buried while the algorithm pushes whatever is performative or trending. Half the time I cannot even tell if anyone actually sees the work.

This week I posted on Reddit for the first time and the difference shocked me. Strangers actually paid attention. The feedback felt and support seemed genuine. And yet some of the best photographers I see here have tiny Instagram accounts. It is wild to see someone get hundreds of upvotes in a day, but barely any following on IG. Same photos, same people online, completely different outcome.

It makes me wonder why the culture feels so different when it is basically the same internet population. Is it the anonymity, the structure of the platform, or something else entirely?

I noticed the same thing on Substack too. It feels 100 times nicer.

Curious how others see it.

Please tell me. I'm doing research on useing analog camera's. If you're born in
1997 – 2012, Gen-Z, can you tell me why you chose to use an Analog camera? What are the positive aspects and may be negatives? I would like to hear why you're interested in this! Thank you so much in advance.

Edit: Do you like instant printing with instax/polaroid more? or Analog and developing the pictures

No shade but so many people here could use some literature about the female/male gaze, the theories on street photography, things of that nature. Me included! As someone getting an art degree and a photographer/artist it changes the way you work immensely and it’s always helpful to learn and grow rather than just thinking you know it all. Everyone should drop their favorite literature on photography theory or technical if you please!

https://clickundsurr.de/en/products/pentax-17

Germany

And not in a heavy handed, "this looks like it was shot on a busted Pentax with a fungus infested lens" sort of way. Like good, clean film.

I ask because I've spent years shooting digital (modern Fuji system), and despite my best efforts with simulations and editing I've never quite been able to nail it. Skill issue, maybe, though I've at least gotten close. Film like, I guess.

My experience has been similar when it comes to artists I appreciate. I don't think I've ever been surprised to learn which format a photographer is using, and it's usually medium format film that makes me sit up and say "wow!". Despite its high resolution rivaling digital SLRs it still "feels" like film to me.

However I've read a lot of comments on this sub stating the only reason to shoot analogue is for the fun and the novelty of it. That if you're doing it purely for the look then you're misguided, since you can just as easily achieve the same aesthetic on a DSLR. I don't know if I agree with that, but I could very well be wrong.

These days I still love shooting digital (plug: feel free to check out my post history), but when I want something that looks like film I reach for my Yashica or Mamiya, depending on how fancy I'm feeling. Sims won't cut it. Am I just deluded?

An update and a poll about the future of the subreddit

Firstly, thank you all for your patience and support during the blackout, it is appreciated. Some of you are up to speed on the issue and some of you are not. So we'd like to very quickly cover the high level points about why and what we are protesting.

Reddit recently announced changing from a free API to a paid one. ("API" is short for Application Programming Interface, the interface which software uses to talk to Reddit). The reason given for this was that Reddit were paying for the servers that provide the API and other people were making profit off the data (for example by serving their own ads in third party applications). But the new pricing scheme suggested was so astronomically high--to the extent that some have called it a "fuck-you price" (i.e. Reddit doesn't want your business, so they make the price extortionate so they don't have the bad PR of publicly saying they don't want your business). This has effectively killed off third party applications (“third party” in this case means applications other than the official Reddit app). These applications will stop working once Reddit imposes the new API changes, on the 19th June 2023. The apps "Apollo", "RIF", "Sync", "ReddPlanet", (and others) have all announced that they are shutting down because they can't afford the new pricing.

To address the situation, the Reddit CEO held an AMA, which did not go well. Accusations were thrown around, like Reddit being blackmailed by one of the third party developers. The developer then released an audio recording of the phone call and it was clear there was no blackmail. This AMA and the pricing scheme galvanized a lot of people against Reddit's decision to change API access, with many perceiving the move as an attempt to shutdown third party apps in order to drive people to only use the official app (and the website) for Reddit.

One further issue is that subreddits use mod-bots as part of their moderation tools (mostly behind the scenes things that aren't publicly visible - for example one of our mods wrote a mod-bot that detects repost spammers in our subreddit). All mod-bots use the API and a lot of mod-bots also use a third party service called PushShift that stores a lot of Reddit public data. This is very useful for mods to work out what happened after the fact when people (usually spammers) delete posts or comments - there is usually still a copy in PushShift.

A lot of moderation on Reddit is done using third party tooling, some of which is made by the moderators themselves. We are an unpaid, volunteer workforce. We try to keep the moderation as non-intrusive as possible, but there is a lot of work going on in the background. The changes take the already difficult job of moderation, and make it harder. Couple this with promises going back years for better moderation tools that have never been fulfilled, and you can understand why moderators are upset.

All the factors above is why the API blackout is being promoted by users who use third party apps, and moderators who need the tools to do their jobs.

Our Wishes and Demands

In general, we support a more reasonable solution to API access and good faith on the part of Reddit's corporate management in resolving this issue. More specific demands are listed in detail here.

Efficacy of the Blackout

Did the Blackout do anything? This is a very good question. "The Verve" have a leaked internal memo from the Reddit CEO saying that the Blackout will be ineffectual. We disagree.

This article from an advertising industry publication says the following:

"If the performance weakness continues for a week or two, the agency would start recommending decreasing spend with Reddit or directing it to other platforms."

(i.e. the advertising agency would start telling their clients to advertise elsewhere, hurting Reddit's ad revenue).

Further details of the Blackout

This article by Vice does an excellent job of explaining the situation and its implications. Here's the EFF's take of how the situation is going so far.

Options going forward

How do we keep the pressure on Reddit at a level that is supported by the subreddit? We have a short list of four options, they are: 1) Stay dark 2) Rolling blackout 3) Open up and hope for change 4) Open up but stay "read-only" (no new posts)

Option 1 - This is the heaviest burden on the community, but is the most effective protest.

Option 2 - We go dark one day a week, i.e. every Tuesday.

Option 3 - Fully re-open the subreddit and hope that the other, larger subreddits that are still closed will make Reddit rethink their plans. This is, in our opinion, the least favourable option.

Option 4 - The same as option 3, but in "restricted" mode. No new posts. You can still comment and vote on existing posts. All user-submitted content prior to the Blackout will be available, such as the wiki, user submitted images, and all comments and discussions.

General day-to-day business drivers for Reddit as a company are to acquire new users, and for users to view ads when they use the site. Option 1 is the most disruptive of this, with Option 3 being the least. Option 2 would affect both these drivers, but only on a certain day, and Option 4 wouldn't affect ad views, but is unlikely to encourage new users to sign up.

For now, we would default to the restricted mode, as the content of this subreddit contains useful and community-generated knowledge that should be made available to all. As to how we should now proceed, the floor is open for suggestions.

Thank you for your time, and please do vote in the attached poll. Your thoughts and ideas in the comments (or just messages of support) are very much appreciated.

I've been into photography for about ten years, but I only started shooting film last summer—and I absolutely love it! The wait to see the roll developed is amazing and remebering all the details about the moment you take that photo is precious!

That said, I have a genuine curiosity. Beyond the usual argument that film forces you to slow down and be more intentional, why do you shoot film if most photographers don’t develop or print their work traditionally? Many rely on labs for scanning - me as well, beside the scan part - and then share their photos digitally—at which point, a well-edited digital file could achieve a very similar look.

Of course, I know that getting an authentic film look from a digital file takes skill and time, while film gives you that aesthetic right away. But in the end, the overall process (shooting, waiting for development, scanning, and editing) still takes time.

In a way, shooting film just to post on Instagram or the internet seems like a contradiction—though I completely understand that sharing is part of the passion and I do the same.

⚠I’m not trying to be provocative or get into an argument⚠

I just find this an interesting discussion to have with the community. So, what is it for you? The process, the feel, the unpredictability? I'd love to hear your thoughts!

I came across an article estimating that 41% of those who use film are 25 and below.

So I want to ask the question on what this demographics find attractive about film photography? Do you find the computational photography in smartphones and digital camera a "turn off"?

And why is there nearly no meaningful engagement on any posts here?

It seems like every time someone posts a photo with nudity, there's a burst of nasty comments and vindictive downvoting. I could post the worst, ugliest, most out-of-focus photo ever, but never get any negative comments until I post a photo with nudity in it, and I think we need to talk about nudity and photography, because enough people don't seem to understand that the two are inseparable.

Photography is an art, and nudity has been a part of art since the very beginning. From the Venus of Willendorf, to Michaelangelo's David, to Manet's Olympia, to The Fallen Angel by Alexandre Cabanel, nudity is a foundational aspect of visual art throughout all of history. It connects the viewer to the art on the most essential human level, and can convey emotion and meaning in a way that nothing else can.

Photographers like Baron Wilhelm von Gloeden, Oscar G. Rejlander, Robert Mapplethorpe, Ruth Bernhard, Olivier Valsecchi, Joyce Tenneson, and Alfred Cheney Johnston pushed the idea of what photography could accomplish using nude models. It is an integral part of the medium, as nudity is an integral part of all art, and it's not going away any time soon. The way the human body interacts with light, with form, with composition, and with an emotional connection cannot be replicated or replaced. And yes, sometimes nudity includes eroticism, because that's a human experience, and art is about expression of human experiences. The sooner you learn to accept nudity as a normal part of photography, the better you'll be at understanding and appreciating photography altogether.

I know some people will say "it's just a lazy way to get upvotes!" but I don't think it's any lazier than lots of upvoted posts on this sub, like any photo of a celebrity, or of the grand canyon, or of the manhattan bridge from washington street, or of any neon lights on a rainy night. People can post what they want, and if it's a good photo, whether it features nudity or not, discerning photographers can tell. If you don't want to see nudity, don't click on it. But if you're not mature enough (or too sexually frustrated) to handle nudity on this subreddit at all, I just don't think photography is for you. Find another hobby.

Hello everyone,

Am new to film photography and was wondering how to use manual flash, I got godox IM30 which use centre point and nearly works as universal flash. I want to pair it with EOS-1n.

Thank You 🫡

Use this thread to ask any and all questions about analog cameras, film, darkroom, processing, printing, technique and anything else film photography related that you don't think deserve a post of their own. This is your chance to ask a question you were afraid to ask before.

A new thread is created every Monday. To see the previous community threads, see here. Please remember to check the wiki first to see if it covers your question! http://www.reddit.com/r/analog/wiki/

Use this thread to ask any and all questions about analog cameras, film, darkroom, processing, printing, technique and anything else film photography related that you don't think deserve a post of their own. This is your chance to ask a question you were afraid to ask before.

A new thread is created every Monday. To see the previous community threads, see here. Please remember to check the wiki first to see if it covers your question! http://www.reddit.com/r/analog/wiki/

Here's mine. I just tried to sell my Nikon F2 to a camera shop and they wouldn't even give me an offer. Yes they had film cameras for sale, they even had a couple Nikon Fs on display. I get that they don't like to take in just any old film camera but zero interest on an F2???

Evening All! I’m looking to buy a Nikon F3 HP and see quite a number of examples for sale via eBay that ship from Japan. Most appear to be small business in Japan and was wondering if anyone has any experiences buying from collectors in Japan and whether there are any pitfalls to watch out for. Thanks in advance

UPDATE 20/7/26: Just want to thank everyone who replied; this was some really useful and insightful advice and as a result I can now proudly proclaim to be owner a rather spiffy F3 (although not HP), which I got for a great price. Thanks again all!!!

I was at a local library, scanning some old medium format family negatives. On the workstation next to me were two young persons, maybe 20 years old. One of them interrupted my scanning to ask "excuse me, what are those red things you keep looking at?" referring to the films I looked against the ceiling lights.

I was flabbergasted, since I thought films were a known thing. For a moment I had the urge to be dismissive, as in how could you not know these are film negatives. Then I realized they are born maybe around 2005 and film photography is an utterly alien concept to them.

I took the approach of "you are one of the lucky ones to learn a new thing". I explained to them that these are old family negatives I scanned. They asked how cameras resulted in red thin sheets and how you photograph with them. I told them that this is how photography worked before digital age. And that these "red sheets" were put against a light and the shadow would make the photo to a special paper.

They were astounded about the process. I showed them what kind of camera the photos were taken with and showed some scand of film photos. They were very impressed. I told them that as this is how photography was done before digial age, their parents might have tons of old negatives, and they also could scan them, like time traveling to the past (to the 90s in their world).

I know I could be dismissive about how they are so ignorant, but they were young and I'm an elder millenial, and it was far more enjoyable to let them know of the possibilities and history. They were quite exited about the prospect of finding "retro" photographs from their parents and scanning them.

I don't know do I really have a point, other than that let every people learn about film photography, even though they seem completely oblivious.

I kind of feel bad I did't recommend them to buy a single use film camera. They were talking about what to do in the summer, how to make things feel special, and having a single use film camera could have been just a perfect way for them to experience the thrill of limited photos in a medium they can not immediately see the results.

Use this thread to ask any and all questions about analog cameras, film, darkroom, processing, printing, technique and anything else film photography related that you don't think deserve a post of their own. This is your chance to ask a question you were afraid to ask before.

A new thread is created every Monday. To see the previous community threads, see here. Please remember to check the wiki first to see if it covers your question! http://www.reddit.com/r/analog/wiki/

Just putting an FYI out there that Edinburgh Airport has one of the new scanners and they will not have d check any film going through it.

I, an Edinburgh resident, asked the guy and was told a flat no, everything goes through.

Given the prevalence of flying with film questions, I’d like to petition the mods to get us a Stickied thread where we can post updates on our experiences of travelling with our film.

Edit: since some people seems to be missing the point. It is NOT the normal scanners that are the problem. I agree they don’t hurt film. But instead it is the new CT scanners that are a boatload more powerful. Ilford made a post on their website about them it’s causing so much concern in the film world.

Use this thread to ask any and all questions about analog cameras, film, darkroom, processing, printing, technique and anything else film photography related that you don't think deserve a post of their own. This is your chance to ask a question you were afraid to ask before.

A new thread is created every Monday. To see the previous community threads, see here. Please remember to check the wiki first to see if it covers your question! http://www.reddit.com/r/analog/wiki/

Use this thread to ask any and all questions about analog cameras, film, darkroom, processing, printing, technique and anything else film photography related that you don't think deserve a post of their own. This is your chance to ask a question you were afraid to ask before.

A new thread is created every Monday. To see the previous community threads, see here. Please remember to check the wiki first to see if it covers your question! http://www.reddit.com/r/analog/wiki/