Why Shoot Film?

[steve_mareno1]

<p>I like film shooting film. Or, I like B&W photos taken w/ film. Less and less people are shooting it these days, in my opinion. This is a good read on why film is still relevant.</p>

<p>http://erickimphotography.com/blog/2012/01/10-reasons-why-you-should-shoot-street-photography-with-film/</p>

[c_watson1]

<p>The usual conceits about film shooting in the article without much attention to the highly variable realities we face. I still shoot both 35mm with Nikons and 120 in Mamiya 645/RB 67 and Bronica SQ-B kits but far less than just a couple of years ago. Why? The film "ecosystem' in my area has nearly collapsed. I can't get proofs or prints direct from 120 film stock any longer from the remaining pro lab in Toronto that still does beautiful processing of b&w/C-41/E-6 material. I'm stockpiling negs and slides but since I'm not going to spend a pile on a scanner equal to the price of a good prosumer DSLR, I'll get a cheapie Epson to do contact sheets and have the keepers scanned at my lab.<br>

Unless you're willing to do the full survivalist thing with home processing and optical printing or hybrid, film can be a bit of a trial with serial frustrations. If all the pieces of analog workflow are accessible and affordable, then it can be as fun and satisfying as the article implies, but things get difficult if they're not. Anyone encouraged by that article needs to measure it against local realities.</p>

[Member69643]

<p>I recall, back in the day, when digital was on the ramp up and I, like many others, adopted it for what it represented to me - complete and total control of my images from start to finish. I had never had much interest in doing my own film work. I knew how, but just had never invested the time and effort into home processing. Nearly all my stuff was C-41 dropped off at the local drugstore, who sent it out to Qualex. Great prints, fast service, not too expensive but as digital marched on, the Qualex lab went away, the drugstore bought a minilab, and everything went downhill. Today, even the drugstore is gone, replaced by a convenience and gas store.</p>

<p>We still have a great local lab and I turned to them for my C-41 stuff up until a couple years ago when I went all-in for home processing. So I left film to get complete image control, and now I've come back - with complete image control. I would say i wish I'd started sooner but the reality is I've greatly enjoyed film uses' decline because I can actually afford the equipment and stuff now.</p>

<p>If you still want old-school, there's thedarkroom.com and others. I still send my slides to Dwayne's in prepaid Fuji mailers (back in stock BTW) so for now, I'm good. </p>

[keith selmes]

<p>I'd say he hit a few nails on the head, and a few points were more questionable, and some plain wrong, but nothing to get excited about.<br>

To me the real reason to do film is because you want to, and the real reason to do digital is practicality. <br>

When I saw that "Film cameras are all pretty much the same. They are all full-frame”, I mentally winced. There's a lot he doesn't know.<br>

</p>

<p> </p>

[dan_south]

I have yet to see digital emulation of black and white that looks like a real black and white print. So, if that is your interest

and you are willing to put in the time and work required to build expertise in that area, that's one reason to shoot film.

 

Color reversal films each have their own color palette and contrast characteristics. I like the way that these films render

colors. Unfortunately, I don't have an endless budget for drum scans.

 

If you enjoy using film cameras - 6x7, 4x5, 8x10 - you can never get the same experience shooting with a tiny little

sensor.

 

If you enjoy the wait and see adventure of the film process, that's another reason to shoot film, albeit recreationally.

[JDMvW]

<p>I shoot film because my beloved old cameras won't work without film.</p>

<p>If Kodachrome and Polaroid 4x5 Type 52 were still available, I might shoot them for their own right.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Great piece, with "real" reasons to shoot film.</p>

<p>I'll never go back (I mainly shoot birds and wildlife so the "free" images are important) but I understand the connection that some have with film and analog, in general.</p>

[szrimaging]

<p>I shoot film for much the same reason as JDM. I love using my TLR, and, well, there is no real digital TLR out there (I do wish there was though).</p>

[marc_bergman1]

<blockquote>

<p>To my understanding, the average digital camera has 256 shades of grey (I haven’t fact-checked this yet) while black and white film has (theoretically) infinite shades of grey.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Wow. An author that doesn't understand either process.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>But once again I argue that this won’t happen much when you are shooting film (as most people don’t mind film photographers as much as digital photographers).</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>When you shove a camera in someones face they object whether it is digital or film. Learn how to interact with your subject.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I honestly find all of it a pain and a headache to keep worrying about having to upgrade to the newest and greatest camera. Although I do feel that technology is great and does make our lives easier, it can also make our lives more stressful in many regards.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I doubt that I spend 1 minute per month worrying that I shoot with a 5 year old DSLR.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>If you have ever gotten a digital photo printed out and a film photo printed out and put them both side-by-side, there is no comparison. Digital images on print look very cold and artificial, while film images look much more natural and smooth. This is because digital files are still not yet up-to-par to film (film has a higher dynamic range).</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>If you can't get top quality prints from your $7000 Leica M9 you don't know how to shoot and properly process your images. Don't blame the media.</p>

<p>I have almost 50 years of shooting film. I still have over 40 film cameras. I have processed both B&W and color film in the darkroom. I had no problem adding digital to my photography. I learned the strengths and weaknesses of digital just like I did film. I never found joy in keeping film undeveloped for a month. I never worried that Kodak would bring out a film that would render my images obsolete. I shot. I developed. I just enjoyed making images. I still do.</p>

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

[thomas_k.]

<p>It's about the process, not the final form it is presented in. It's like handwriting vs typing. Some can write poetry only with pencil and paper, some do it as well on their smartphone - there is no point in trying to prove that one is better then the other.</p>

[David_Cavan]

<p>I'm glad the author enjoys his work, and the process. But better? Meh..., I'll go with "different" in my opinion. </p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>I don't like film but I love my Canon, Contax and Bessa Rangefinder cameras. They need film to work, darn the luck. Can't afford a Leica M9 this week. So when the drop-in digital sensor is made (hey, I can hope) I'll stop using film. </p>

[walter_degroot]

<p><em> stopped reading the link when he talked about "loading film" " winding and clicking the shutter"</em><br>

<em>sounds to me a LOT like smoking . " opening the pack, lighting and holding the cigarette. etc..<br /></em><br>

<em>I have both kinds of cameras. After 60+ years of shooting film, the transition to digital is strange.<br /></em><br>

<em>( t is strange transitioning to digital, * thanks for the great digital camera- more so when I really figure it all out)<br /></em><br>

<em>I enkoy using film and developing and less to attempting to enlarge an entire roll in an evening.<br /></em><br>

<em>Is it the fact that that is what I am used to. ?<br /></em><br>

<em>the autor of the " good read" reminds me not of a photographer, but a person looking for a different experience.<br /></em><br>

<em>Likle a reactor or revertng to an earlier time.<br /></em><br>

<em>If you want quick and easy digital is ok.<br /></em><br>

<em>but film cameras require you to slow down and think more.<br /></em><br>

<em>If you only back up 40 years. It is pretty easy.<br /></em><br>

<em>it you gop back to wooden cam,eras it is more of an effort.<br /></em><br>

<em> </em><br>

<em>the writer may not fully realize this<br /></em></p>

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>drop-in digital sensor is made (hey, I can hope)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It may, by now, be truly hopeless. If it were going to happen (note subjunctive in English, non-native speakers), it would have happened when there were still lots of film-only shooters.<br>

There was a company that claimed to have one underdevelopment, but it was unable to produce even a prototype. Later on (discussion at http://petapixel.com/2011/04/04/35mm-cartridge-that-transforms-film-cameras-into-digital/ ) another company announced one as an April Fool's joke, but alas....</p>

<p>The market is surely too much of a niche-market now for it to be profitably produced, I suspect.</p>

[flavio_egoavil]

<p>It is nice to see people doing a pitch for shooting film but sometimes i'm afraid that the people who write such articles fall into the easy nonsense of downputting digital cameras.</p>

<p>Digital cameras are a blessing. I love my Canon 5D MKI. I don't care if it's a bit old compared to the latest models, it is good enough.</p>

<p>That being said, i own over 10 perfectly working film cameras and use them a lot. In fact i have next to me a very nice 6x9 folder, the Ensign Selfix 820, loaded with HP5+ and ready to shoot. <br>

"Shooting film is fun", that's enough of a reason. No need for a lengthy article.</p>

[waltflanagan]

<p>This article should be retitled "10 Reasons Why Eric Kim Likes to Shoot Film." I understand some of his arguments but it's all personal opinion kind of stuff and nothing objective. Some of it is downright misleading. Used $100 film SLR vs new $2500 DSLR+lens when you can get a new crop sensor body and lens for <$500. I like to shoot film for some of the same reasons he listed but when I think about it it's mainly about personal enjoyment of the process and not that much about results like kneading bread instead of using a bread machine.</p>

[Brad_]

Compelling photos talk, all the other this-vs-that BS, walks. OTOH, some are more into the this-vs-that.

Good to know what your photography is really about.

[MichaelChang]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"This article should be retitled "10 Reasons Why Eric Kim Likes to Shoot Film."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'd agree with that. <br>

<br>

Eric Kim is a successful niche photographer with a formula that works for him. He can just as well shoot with an iphone but then he'd be competing in an arena not likely to differentiate himself from others as distinctly. </p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I shoot mostly film but I can only agree with him on the fact that negative film has a bit more dynamic range than digital. I disagree with him on all others.</p>

[pjmeade]

<p>I think that there is a resurgence in film photography, possibly for all the reasons suggested.<br>

But I think that the Ben Anderson shot was taken with a 5D #justsaying</p>

[grey_rogacion]

<p>I shoot film simply because it makes me happy, learning and using the basics with a mechanical, manual camera. A mechanical, manual cam would only need film, no batteries and it's here to shoot anytime................................I've learned to tinker, clean, re-seal and re-oil and I enjoy, value my camera's more now that I feel-care for them. </p>

[DB_Gallery]

I shoot 90% black and white film and wet print. No matter what medium, format or brand you are using, photography

involves an act of vision, decision and process to get to the final image you want and how you want to show it. So in

my case, I enjoy the process of film and darkroom far more than digital. And because that joy lies in using film, I do my

very best work in using it...my heart is simply in it and that shows in my work.

 

In earning my sole income from full time shooting, I need my work to keep getting better. The only way that is going to

happen is to both keep shooting and keep doing things I love in ways I love to do them. That is why the future of my

career as a photographer is and always will be in using film.

 

If all that ever mattered in life was the destination, then the journey would not even be on the radar. But life is not like that

and is hardly the destination. Life *is* the journey and anyone who thinks that the way you arrive at your final image does

not matter is fooling themselves only...

 

You only have 24 hours in one day so use your time wisely, do what makes *you* happy, not what the Internet tells you is "better"...

[alan_zinn]

<p>I enjoyed the article. The film culture there sounds wonderful. <br /> One type of photography v. another is not the point. It is all good. You can't make a better picture with one camera or another. You CAN have a film camera - or any type of camera - that makes an image like NO other. <br /> I have my film processed at a CVS 1 hr. lab ($3.00 for uncut roll) They take my home-loaded cassettes and keep me supplied with empties for free. I usually start shooting film at this time of year. I went in last week, with some trepidation, to check and see if their processor was still up and running. The peg board where the film was always displayed was stocked with <em><strong>cotton balls!</strong></em><br /> I was glad to see the young women who works at the photo department was still there. She said she was as busy with film as ever. Whew!</p>

[sfcole]

<p>One practical reason: my hard drive crashed and all digital photos for 2 years are lost. However, I can rescan all the negatives. Ok, I admit I didn't back up like I should have...<br>

One philosophical reason: One of the things I like about medium format is the sharpness and detail with a hint of granularity (the loss of Plus-X was a real hit...). While many people will happily simulate that grain with software, I find that process too derivative: one is simply aping the imperfections of film. It would be like adding hisses and pops to a modern digital sound recording. Digital photography should be its own medium, and stop merely copying the past for sentimental reasons.</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p> It would be like adding hisses and pops to a modern digital sound recording</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

That's done a lot, usually with sampling.</p>