Any reason to shoot film nowadays?

Started Apr 12, 2013 | Discussions thread
Cailean Gallimore Veteran Member • Posts: 6,083
Re: Any reason to shoot film nowadays?

Mahmoud Mousef wrote:

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

It amuses me the way that some people have built a wall in their mind with digital on one side, and analogue on the other.

The wall is already there: added costs and huge inconveniences with film, except for those getting paid to shoot with it, or somehow enjoying the process or gear around it. I would file these under "gear lust", and "memories of the film era and the events that surrounded it" and "being different for my clients".

I shoot digital and love it. I shoot film and love it. It's all photography, all the pleasure of creating images - creating an image that you love and want to look at. Whether it's created through the use of digital or analogue processes is irrelevant.

It's relevant when you count the costs and inconveniences of film, in my opinion. That is the real 'wall' these days. There is no immediacy, no quick sharing and no instant feedback to see how something turned out on the camera or elsewhere. The constant burden of "wasting a shot" and less risk-taking with shots due to this, particularly amongst those who aren't professionals. The advent of digital has all but killed film, and for good reasons. There will always be pros (and enthusiasts) that will choose it for some reasons, but for 99.99% of us, those reasons are best left to the enthusiasts and selected photogs who may like it.

So....what do you like about shooting film, specifically?

As far as I can tell from the comments here the main benefits are:


* using a camera where there is little or no power around (light on the batteries!)

* the look and feel of some old cameras

* I'm sure some nostalgia comes into it and the events surrounding a person's film camera use

* I'm sure some gear lust comes into it (especially how well things were built back in film's heyday)

* the different 'look' you can get with some film or processing (you can do wonders with digital too)

* long esposures without sensor noise

* businesses charging clients more for film because they are asking for things to be shot on film

* some sort of exclusivity and a more exclusive experience or 'club' with whom to shoot and develop film with (a more refined crowd perhaps?)

* a more interactive or involving (or whatever) experience than digital


And despite these meagre advantages or 'differences', I'd still I'd run for the hills if I had to give up my digital camera for any length of time for a film-based one, with the associated burdens of getting a third-party involved in processing and associated burdens of changing film rolls and lack of free experimentation and constant cost burdens.

I count my blessings I live in an era where digital has freed so many photographers from the silly burdens most photographers had to live with for most of the last century. You can use both, by my question is still: WHY?


The bottom line answer is very simple: I enjoy it, and like the resultsĀ 

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Biggs23
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow