When I was a pup
I loved taking pictures. I couldn’t very bloody well afford it, but I would save my nickles and dimes and buy rolls of expired Plus-X pan at the local camera shop, wait till I had five exposed rolls, and scrape up 95 cents for a Kodak Tri Chem pack, which would, if you stretched it, just do five rolls.
The trick, as I remembered it, was to take lots of pictures hoping you’d get some good ones, and within the limits of my budget, I did.
But my budget was pretty limited.
I have come far from those days with my Argus C3 and the burnt fingers from the magnesium laden flashbulbs, but I have not had a “Decent” digital camera with which I could make decent pictures, just a lot of el stinko point and shooters. But I have been saving my nickles and dimes again, and tonight I sold a couple items on Ebay that let me pull the trigger on a spanking new Nikon D3100 from Adorama. I also sprung for the $85 three year diamond waranty, which seems to be designed for me, as it’s proof against the more stupid things a duffer can do- things involving moisture, sand, impact,etc.
I look forward to having the freedom to take absolute wads of pictures. Maybe once in a while I can get a nice one. Anyway, it should be here in a couple days.
15 comments Og | Uncategorized
I loved Plus-X. Like chiseling an image into granite. Lovely fine grain. Sadly gone into that graveyard of forgotten photo technologies…although you can still buy Tri-X (bleah). Ilford still have a reasonable fascimile in their FP4 Plus film (ISO 125). I used to use AGFA Rodinol to process black and white…still available I guess. Hmm, maybe I need to get out my YashicaMat 124G… :)
OTOH I’ve had my Nikon D70 for a number of years and I still loves my preciousssss. I just don’t have time to do photography anymore :(
You won’t regret it. I love my D3100. Enjoy!
Yep, the odor of developer and stop solution is as lost to most people as the wonderful smell of homemade cinnamon rolls. Now everything is digital, or from a cardboard tube.
I enjoy having my Nikon Coolpix digital. Small enough to take everywhere. Able to take video and stills. Lots of storage. But the best part is, no moving parts. it didn’t have one of those silly pop-out lenses that dust and sand could get into and jam the lens. And I can take thousands of pictures for free, since I seldom develop any. But I do sometimes post them on line. Most of the pics on my blog are from that camera, but lately they have been from my Samsung galaxy S3
The only thing I miss about traditional photography is the expense, scans of negatives from 20 years ago result in FAR more detailed photos than even my mid-line Canon DSLR. My previous digital camera had over 25,000 pictures taken with it before I got my new one, I shudder to think about the cost to process that many photos!
If’n you have a smartass phone, shirt-pocket digitals are as out-of-date as Og’s old Argus. My Galaxy S-3 does everything I want it to, and I can do anything with the images afterwards without hooking a cable up or pulling out the SD card.
I remember using a Kodak 110. Now that was a limited camera. I finally got a decent SLR and took a bunch of pictures with that. Kind of quite when Wally ruined a whole bunch of Kodachrome I took in Hawaii. Have had several digital cameras and miss the speed I had with film. They are starting to get the speed up so I might have to look at a Digital version of an SLR.
Course everything I want to take pictures of is grown and gone. Or on the way out.
Ah, time. Such a precious commodity. To bad we don’t know this until it is nearly gone.
If I was independently wealthy, I’d shoot medium format all day.
But I’m not, and digital is about ten million times more convenient, too.
These days it’s more likely to be an Oly 4/3 camera than my giant Pentax, on pure size grounds.
(Though contra Rivrdog, while a good camera phone is very good, it can’t compete – for versatile photography – with even a $100 point-and-shoot, simply because the sensors are too small and they have no zoom.
The signal advantage of the phone camera is that it’s always there, and good enough, which makes up for a lot.)
Sig: i just passed up a 500 on ebay for about what i paid for the D3100.
You can buy a digital back for a blad now. Theyre only THIRTY THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS.
How cool! I am so tickled for you, you hardly ever have anything nice for yourself. This is great!
Jenny
If you would like an Argus C3 with case and flash unit, I’d be happy to give you one. I have several in my collection and need to free up some space.
Drop me an email if you would like to have one to remember our puppy days.
I also have a collection. I need several models to fill it. Shoot me an email at mhardig at aol dot com.
I started out on a Kodak Retina IIc. (small “c”, model)
Schnieder-Kreuzach f/2.8 lens, Compur leaf shutter, X synch to 1/500th.
That mi amigos, was still one of the most finely made German rangefinder cameras made. Lube in the rangefinder getting gummy n’ sticky did most of those in.
And yes, Plux-X was my stock film, souped in Kodak D-76, usually.
Good times…good times.
Jim
Sunk New Dawn
Galveston, TX
Og: Cheap digital backs start at a very affordable $8k or so.
(All my MF stuff is old, Russian, or both.
I’ve gotten very good results from a $
Sig: I have a yashica mat 124G, and I lust after Blads, but I do always think of buying a Pentax or a Russian SLR.