Everytime I walk past the Poundland shop in my local town centre, I always remember the Trigger Happy TV sketch where Dom Jolly walks round a pound store asking how much everything is to the increasing exasperation of the shop assistant, it goes something like this:
“So how much is this?”
“What about this”
“A pound. Everything here a pound”
“Really, so how much is this then”
“A pound. Everything a pound”
“So is this a pound?” etc.
I mention this not just because it still makes me chuckle, but because I’d heard that the Poundland chain were selling Kodak colour film for a quid a roll. OK, so it was cheap 200ISO 24 exposure colour, but it was Kodak, and a quid a roll is significantly less than Ektar or Portra which I normally pay about a fiver for.
At that price, it seemed a good choice to run through a recently acquired second F100 body I’d bought as a bargain, just to ensure it all worked. As I’d got no excursions planned, I thought I’d use the roll on my little girl Eloise, who is the subject of most of my photographs these days.
I couldn’t get a slow enough shutter speed to get a properly blurred background on this roundabout, although in retrospect, the latitude of film is such that I could have slowed the shutter speed by a stop or two and still have got away with it.
All said and done, it performed OK. I took the film for processing at my local Tesco as it’s quick and cheap, so it’s hard to make a truly objective judgement on the quality as certainly the prints appear to have a slight colour cast, but the scans look OK and reasonably neutral. I’m sure that both scans and prints would look better if I’d have sent them to Metro Colour Labs for processing, but it was hard to justify the cost given that it was cheap film being run through a recently acquired second-hand camera.
All images Nikon F100 and Nikkor 20mm.
They say that wide angle’s shouldn’t be used for people photographs, but being a contrary sod, it sounded like it was worth a go. For close in photography a 20mm proved a good choice as it allowed me to get more of the surrounding environment in around Eloise.
Playing with daddy’s old toys at nana and grandpa’s. Thirty something years ago, I was doing the same thing in almost the same spot!
5 Comments Add yours
Your lovely photographs brought back dear memories of playing in the sand tray with my two toddlers, who are now 15 and 18. I don’t know who enjoyed playing in the sand the most… These shots have come out so well considering the relatively humble origins of the materials and camera. Really top photos.
Thanks Iain. I don’t tend to post up photos of Eloise or many other none-industrial / exploration/ railway subjects, but I thought this would make a nice change.
I think it’s fun to use old, used or inexpensive equipment. Particular when the result gets to be like this. Great photographs of your little girl. And not using wide angel for people photography? Yes, they say so, but it’s an excellent tool if you want to include the environment – and do watch out for extreme distortion.
Thanks yes, I still get satisfaction out of using film, although I mostly shoot digital. Film cameras are so cheap now – my Nikon F100’s would have cost over £800 new, but I bought them for about £150 each, with grips, in mint condition! My FM cost me £50! But it’s not just the cameras, I find myself taking more time and choosing my shots with film, as I know I only have 24 pr 36 shots, then some cost, and time before I see the results. But for every 100 shots I take, I probably get a better percentage of good images on film than with digital, but I probably get more great images on digital.
Shooting with film definitely changes the way of shooting – and not necessarily to the better….