As so many times,

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

I don't know whether this has been shown before? But as film and happiness certainly go hand in hand, I decided just to show that. Done with a 35mm on sensia 100.

 

[Julian de'Courcy]

Far too energetic, yet was it not the good times when all this was possible.
I like the shadows they fit well especially the one with the missing figure.

 

[Brian Moore]

I like this one, Ivar. You've framed it very nicely with the jumper to the left and the shadows to the right. That was good anticipation on your part.

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

Thank you both. I do sense what you mean Julian. I merely meant that it is a happy jolt and done with film in the camera. Whether it is better with film or done digitally, is actually irrelevant, to me anyway! A good image shall always be a good image by some and not so by others! Cheers mates.

 

[Julian de'Courcy]

Thank you both. I do sense what you mean Julian. I merely meant that it is a happy jolt and done with film in the camera. Whether it is better with film or done digitally, is actually irrelevant, to me anyway! A good image shall always be a good image by some and not so by others! Cheers mates.

Ivar digital v film seems etched deep. The reference was how we could all do flips, maybe not as always as this one but maybe sometimes. So not a reference too film
I often use pencils to make pictures remember them

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

I do flips every day Julian, up in my head. Have to, in order to maintain stability. In other words I do stay loyal to Oly and especially Pentax right now, it is snowing. While I wait for Norwegian doughnuts being done, not in the least like them on Brian's side, and gaining weight. Can't wait! I am a bit slow this time at night, with the oven going red hot and temperature rising, - inside.
I have a question for you though, when a film is scanned and shown here as well as a digital being shown here after both having been "tampered" with, what is the difference except perhaps psychologically?

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Ivar, this is brilliant! The best photo I've ever seen of a man doing a flip

Of course there is a difference, not just psychological. This is a pixelated version of a film shot, not a pixelated version of a digital shot. Plus, the horizon is off - no lines on a screen to tell you that, when you are about to pull the trigger! Of course, there are now digital filters designed to imitate this feel of film, and they can be very successful. But for me, the end result is not as important to me as the process. I like shooting film. I like waiting, sometimes a couple of weeks, to get the results. I like looking through the prints of all the shots, not just printing off the best one or two. I like the cameras. I like film!

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

Now tell me Rob, isn't that psychological I knew you'd come out of the woodwork on this one The main and most important thing about it, is that we all enjoy and are happy with what we are doing All the best and thank you for your comments! Almost forgot, there is another difference in the process, with film I always measured for the middle and the ground, with dgital I measure from the sky mostly if that one is included!

 

[Julian de'Courcy]

Now tell me Rob, isn't that psychological I knew you'd come out of the woodwork on this one The main and most important thing about it, is that we all enjoy and are happy with what we are doing All the best and thank you for your comments! Almost forgot, there is another difference in the process, with film I always measured for the middle and the ground, with dgital I measure from the sky mostly if that one is included!

So true that as long as we enjoy and truly it does not matter whether digital or digitised film.
I'd equate digital to building an image out of lego blocks, painting by numbers which it is literally( in Oly's case by mathematicians in Japan) and it is what it resembles and is clearly evident in the resulting image, even so with a scanned film. Yet the scanned film does leave it's analogue footprint which is clear and evident. Maybe some are not so refined to notice

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

So true that as long as we enjoy and truly it does not matter whether digital or digitised film.
I'd equate digital to building an image out of lego blocks, painting by numbers which it is literally( in Oly's case by mathematicians in Japan) and it is what it resembles and is clearly evident in the resulting image, even so with a scanned film. Yet the scanned film does leave it's analogue footprint which is clear and evident. Maybe some are not so refined to notice

Being refined is a two edged sword Julian and is very subjective as well as the word refine can also mean to cook, so are you saying that scanned film compared to digital, is a cook up? Or are the socalled refined in this case all cooked up? In that case I'll play with my egos, sorry forgot an L I think in front of .....

 

[Julian de'Courcy]

Being refined is a two edged sword Julian and is very subjective as well as the word refine can also mean to cook, so are you saying that scanned film compared to digital, is a cook up? Or are the socalled refined in this case all cooked up? In that case I'll play with my egos, sorry forgot an L I think in front of .....

LOL your a slippery eel Ivar and love it. Must get back cook more photo's

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

I am so sorry Julian, but now I have been made redundant to a certain extent, there is only one side of my body's extremities that is able to work. Last night I was close to amputation, really. But I managed to eel myself out of it.

 

[Pete Askew]

I do believe it might have been but it is a superb shot anyway. Great sense of movement and I love the shadows.

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

I do believe it might have been but it is a superb shot anyway. Great sense of movement and I love the shadows.

Thank you Pete, it is an image I like quite a bit.