Why do you use film?

<p>Hi everyone, I am curious as to why you choose to use film in your photography? I personally use film 100% of the time in my black and white fine art work and the majority of the time for my color work (landscapes, architecture, nature, etc.) I always learn something from everyone here so I appreciate you sharing your reasons why you use film. <br>

To get things started here are a few of my reasons:<br>

1.) I prefer the exposure latitude and dynamic range of film. <br>

2.) I personally like the "look" of film images. <br>

3.) I like having the option of a parallel workflow (analog and digital). <br>

4.) I like the analog backup of film. <br>

5.) When the right subject matter is printed in black and white from a true b/w negative, I can't think of anything better.<br>

How about you?<br>

Tim</p>

 

<ul>

</ul>

<p>I used film back into the late 1940s and since as a child, man, and apparently crotchity (hmpf) senior.<br>

I still shoot film when I want to shoot with a camera that is not digital. (that's who) I've finally admitted it, I'm a collector, but I haven't bought a film camera since yesterday....</p>

<p>But if the vapor-ware insertable digital back that would have fit into non-digital cameras had ever come to pass, I would rarely choose to shoot film for its own sake.<br /> It's costly, always needs spotting, and even black and white is so much fun when you can pick and choose from the full spectrum of color in creating it (I had gone to C/N film for scanning for that reason, before I got a real digital camera).</p>

<p>Because I don't know any better.</p>

<p>Larry, you are funny... I was hoping for a little more... :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Ich bin ein Masochist. ;-p</p>

<p>Hard to break a 55-year habit.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

<p>I grew up with film and still use it about 30% of the time, especially because I have some outstanding film lenses and cameras, which don't work at all or as well in the digital world without many 10s of thousands of $ of needless additional expense. So scanning film for many purposes is the highway I've chosen.</p>

<p>I don't do this for a living. I used only about 60 rolls of film in 2010-- mixture of 35mm and 120, some C41 and some B & W I develop myself. This means my annual processing costs are low, and I have no economic reason to switch to digital. I have good film cameras and lenses and I like them, so I might as well keep using them.</p>

<p>Having said that, I may not be able to get excellent C41 processing locally for much longer, so a Canon 5D Mark 3 or 4 is no doubt in my future. I'll still dabble in darkroom B & W.</p>

<p> Film has character. Definite personality. Broad range of moods based on film + developer + paper choice. Few things are more exiting than to drop a seemingly blank piece of paper into developer and see nothing till the 30sec mark, then see the density build and the image unfold. Your vision and personality manifest. Digital simply can't compete with the endorphin high of image capture with silver and sunbeams.<br>

Just the opinion of an old school manual focus manual exposure film guy. Plus I have 30+ years of film/darkroom stuff around to use. Old dogs you know:)<br>

Chris</p>

 

<p>Hi Tim, I don't think anything quite does it for me like the Hasselblad and b&w film. For me that's the purest form of expression. That being said, my darkroom is ripped apart, chemicals all dead and numerous rolls of expression from last three years waiting to be expressed, lol. So, what can I say? But, I like your #5.</p>

<p>I only shoot B+W film and I print silver gelatin prints. I do my own processing. I love the camera I shoot, and I like to have a physical master, ie, the negative. I haven't had to spot a negative in 5 years. I dry my negs carefully in a highly protected enviorment and print with a cold light. My negatives will exist long after floppy disks, CDs, external hard drives, etc are long gone. I love what i do and see no reason to change it. If I was shooting commercially things would change. But I don't, by choice.</p>

<p>Why I shoot film ? Because my Rolleiflex won't work with anything else.</p>

You mean someone has invented a camera that takes photos without film?

 

I can't see that catching on.

<p>I got caught up thinking that I was behind the times and tried to go all-digital in 2006, but it didn't change my approach to photography like some folks. I didn't all of a sudden shoot 1,000 images per day or outing.</p>

<p>For the camera I had at the time, I found exposure & color more of a concern/obstacle than shooting Fuji Velvia, and digital was supposed to be a photographer's relief from those issues. Within a year I eventually gravitated back to my film gear and slide film.</p>

<p>I prefer using a camera rather than a computer to take photos. I'll never go digital.</p>

<p>I do computers for a living. Don't need them during my time. Having said that, I have two hobbies that involve images. One is the 5mp pocket thing I use instead of a note book for projects and "stuff". <br>

The other film images are products I use for my photography hobby. It's all about the hobby, and taking the picture,,, not about a snapshot to remember something.<br>

I've never really gotten this down to words well,,, but if I'm out fly fishing, or working on my lathe, and need a shot, it's the digital thing to record something. This is about spending the day fishing.<br>

If I'm going out to take pictures. It's to take pictures, I might take the fly rod with me as a subject to use, and even try to catch a fish, but the whole show is photography, not fishing.<br>

Poor job of describing it (again) ;-)</p>

<p>> Why do you use film?<br>

Because I like the handling and feel of old film cameras. The capture medium is of little import to me.</p>

<p>Digital is way too expensive. They release a new camera that is better every month. I have a Nikon F5 and I spend my time composing the image, not looking at an histogram on a computer. I know that I will get my picture the first time. I do not have to press the shutter and get 20 shots for one pose.<br>

I shoot Kodak ektar 100. It scans perfectly and it is beautiful. Film for portraits is the best. I can always buy a better scanner and rescan my negs to get a higher resolution. If you go digital, what you shot is what you keep.<br>

Then i use my scan image to convert it using a software i wrote into B&W. I process the image with my software too for retouching. The i print the image from the software on an inkjet print that I contact print in my darkroom on fiber paper. I get a beautiful silver print that matches what was displayed on my monitor.<br>

Best of both world.<br>

BTW i am looking for beta testers for my program. If you are interested, email me and I'll send you a link.<br>

Pierre</p>

<p>Maybe I should I should expand on my first comment. <strong>I don't know any better</strong> way to get the type of image I want.</p>

<p>For two primary reasons: (1) Film produces better images (IMHO) and (2) it is more challenging to produce a good photograph. Relatively speaking, it is easy to create a reasonably good image with a decent digital camera and some imaging software. So, if virtually anyone can do it, why would I want to?</p>

<p>Plus, I was weaned on Dektol.</p>

 

<p>LOL Russ I think I still sweat Rodinal on some days. :)</p>

<p>...because I still can find film to buy and labs that develop film.</p>

<p>'Cause I like it better than digital. Like others, I grew up with film so today I use mostly film. Exclusively for B&W and for most color. I still maintain a conventional B&W darkroom.</p>

<p>Simply put, I think it's fun and a break from the ordinary. Lord knows I spend enough time during the week on my computer, reading books on my e-reader, using a navigation system in my car, listening to music on my ipod, so on and so forth. Shooting, developing, and printing BW film is a whole process that engages me in a way few other activities do these days. There is something physical, organic, and demanding about the whole process. There's a time and a place for digital, but there are also days when I just want to get out and shoot some film. I don't know. I just finished a two hour printing session. Maybe I'm high on photo chemicals.</p>

<p>Sometimes I wonder. Don't like 36 exposure rolls because for me they are too hard to handle. Had a wet roll of 36 x Tmax 100 hit the floor the other day when one end slipped off the thin wire hook I use to hang film. I said "why am I still shooting film?" In the end it's because I like being involved in the process and using my digital camera feels a bit like painting by numbers compared to traditional B&W photography.</p>

<p>Same reason I prefer watercolor over oils and radio that uses radio waves over internet "radio". Nothing to do with superiority of one medium over another. Just a personal preference for and enjoyment of the process.</p>