Does anyone still use film?

My point was that the maximum number of exposures was only 16. A 220 roll was twice as long. No backing paper.

Rich

Backing paper?

I don't know what the world was like before the internet. Its always been there for me.

"You're not in Kansas any more, Dorothy!"

Rich

There was a length of paper attached to either end of the 220 film, but unlike 120, it didn’t extend behind the actual film.

😏

Details.

As I said, no backing paper.

Rich

Dorothy from Wizard of Oz? 😂😂

Yes. Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz.

Rich

120 film had backing paper for the entire length of the film. To get the greater length of the 220 roll in the camera, the thickness of the film/backing paper had to be decreased. So no backing paper. The paper served only as a leader and tail (trailer), so the film could be handled.

Rich

I guess my generation are spoilt?

Ooooooh yeah!

But that's OK. That's true of every generation. That's the plan. And it turns out to be a good thing.

Rich

I have been called a spoilt brat at times but I'll take it as a compliment from you Rich 😀

Every few months I consider this but then reconsider because it strikes me as silly. I, like many older folk, once had to use film but part of the process was also using a darkroom. I'd spend hours there printing away completely engrossed in the process and results.

But now 'film shooting' seems to be as you describe. Buy something such as a Canon F1, shoot a roll or two and then send it off to be scanned and inserted into PS as if it was shot with my current MILC. I can't see the move unless it includes the darkroom step and for many of us, there's no room.

I can see doing wet plate as well. AFAIK, you can still buy the needed equipment and the instruction is somewhere around. As far as this shoot, scan and then PS - I wonder what the point is.

I guess the main reason anyone would do film is either for learning experience or for nostalgia?

Those are two reasons. But hardly the only ones.

Another is that there truly are individuals who prefer the "look" of film images. They prefer to work in film their entire careers.

There is no way, today to digitally create "large format" images. That is still the purview of film. 4" x 5" and larger. I feel that digital medium format has surpassed 4x5 in image quality, but there are a lot of large format photographers who would seriously debate that issue. There is no arguing, however, that there are technical issues that only a physical 4x5 and larger camera can solve. And there are no digital sensors that size. Only film.

Then there is the realm of image quality from prints made by large format masters, directly from large format negs. Those have to be experienced to be believed. The quality of prints from LF negs enlarged to 16x20 and somewhat larger are gorgeous.

Then there is the experience of seeing a contact print from an 8x10 or larger negative. There are few people, even those who have worked a lifetime in film who have actually seen large format contact prints. Of course, the subject matter, exposure, lighting and composition all matter, but the potential image quality from LF contact prints is unsurpassed, even by the best digital imaging.

Rich

My name's OpenCube, and I have a 220 film addiction.

😂😂😂

220 film is no longer available.

😥

Rich