>>3973578>He didn't stock up on Neopan when it was still $4 per roll$4USD? YES. That's a horrid price. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. For Christ's sake even Tmax used to cost less than that 6 or 7 years ago. If you want to cheap it out get Ultrafine xtreme for B&W or Kodak Gold for color.
Really, unless you're going for the 'lomo' effect, it's a bad idea to use film that old which hasn't been frozen just to save a few cents.
>>3973576What was behind the decision to use such a high speed film of wilderness in the daytime? Don't see how all the extra grain contributes to the images. Almost looks infrared. Reminds me of The Park by Kohei Yoshiyuki.
>>3973580The only time it's permissible to be inconsistent with film is if you're testing new equipment. Even if you think you can’t afford it, just be more judicious with shooting. The reason for this is if you take a bunch of pictures which you think are unrelated but end up looking good together, it’s gonna look pretty bad if they’re all shot with visibly different film. It probably doesn’t matter to most people here but it’s just a bad habit.
tl;dr if you want to take the trouble to get into film, do yourself a favor and don’t cheap it out on stuff that actually matters.
