Why do you shoot film... Digital is so much better!

Status
Not open for further replies.
cambsno

cambsno

Messages
20,398
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
Why bother with film when digital is so much better? I mean, once you have the kit its basically a 'free' hobby.

- No expensive film to buy or process.
- With Digital I can have the camera tell me its metered ok and can take a test shot to instantly see and adjust.
- It will AF for me
- I can take hundreds of pics today and see them straight away, if I think one will look better in B&W I can change it. I dont have to wait a week or 2 to get the film back.
- I can adjust ISO to take pics in poor light one minute and good light the next.

So whats the point of using this outdated method when digital is easier, has no running costs and is better? Interested to hear your thoughts and reasons.

I write this as I am about to post 2 films to AG to be processed! Although I use my D700 all the time (and think its brilliant) I still enjoy using my 2 film cameras and spent part of my holiday last week with a D700, Rolleicord Va and a Leica M2 round my neck. Although the MF aspect is a pain with the kids, I like the mechanical way of taking the pics, and know I only have a frame or 2 to get the shot I want, so cant take 10 knowing 1 will be fine. I think more about composition and how I want the image to look. I get excited when I get home and the cd has arrived, and see which ones were good and which were not. The fact that both of my cameras are 50 years old has a charm too.
 
This should be fun....


Mainly because it's not better.

Film has better dynamic range so I don't have to worry about blowing out highlights (negative film).
I can use large pieces of film to record great amounts of detail which even a D800 can only dream about.
I hate sitting at a computer to do post processing.
I like having real prints on proper photographic paper.
Film cameras are cool, digital cameras are soul dead lumps of plastic with a computer inside.

I agree that digirtal is easier and more convenient. Doesn't make it better though.


Steve.
 
Last edited:
Because I can.

(It has a different feel to my digital camera, and if I am honest, I feel more 'at one' with the film camera, compared to the digital camera. My TLR is teaching me to think about what I shoot, not reel of 1000000's and hope for the best)
 
Last edited:
I don't have a connection with a shot I have taken on digital. It may be a great shot (unlikely...:LOL:) but I can guarantee that I didn't actually enjoy taking it. If I've climbed a hill or walked for miles or been patient enough to wait for the right conditions I can feel satisfied with myself for getting the 'great' shot but if I've taken the 'great' shot on film I get the same satisfaction but I also feel attached to it emotionally which I don't with digital. I may be strange...I am strange....

Also all of the above, especially the 'film cameras are cool' bit(y)

Andy
 
****Why bother with film when digital is so much better?***

H'mm why paint when you can take a photo :) Anyway can you give me a reason why should I not continue to use film? Everyone is different from pros to ordinary amateurs, so there is not one answer.
 
- No expensive film to buy or process.
Your FF camera and gear cost you thousands. One of mine cost me a tenner at a car boot sale and a medium format camera cost me £13.

- With Digital I can have the camera tell me its metered ok and can take a test shot to instantly see and adjust.

So your metering is wrong then? With film, the camera meters for me , i can take a shot and know it will be fine with no adjustments

- It will AF for me
You can get AF film cameras

- I can take hundreds of pics today and see them straight away, if I think one will look better in B&W I can change it. I dont have to wait a week or 2 to get the film back.
Being able to machine gun hundreds of photos is half the problem. Id rather take 10 that i love rather than hundreds that are mediocre snaps, I can develop a roll of film in 30 minutes.

- I can adjust ISO to take pics in poor light one minute and good light the next.
You can shoot film and develop it all against different ISO speeds.
 
Last edited:
For fun.

</thread>
 
The flippant answer is "because that's what large format comes in that I can afford"

It's not about dynamic range or anything like that, its about a process and craft of making pictures with a view camera, and for now (and likely forever) that means film. Once I've got myself sorted out with a UV exposure unit and I can print how I want to instead of having to do it digitally atm then I can go for the complete process, but for now the view camera is enough

So essentially, and rather scarily, I agree with Rob :eek:
 
Andysnap said:
^^^ I don't know what this means :shrug: Am I being simple or am I just not down with kids?
Click to expand...


:LOL: the </thread> is just "IT Geek" shortcode for "this is the end of the thread"

I Assume you can work out the rest of it ;)
 
Most of my reasons have already been given, but the most important to me are

1. Quality. I don't get blown highlights with black and white film. I always do with digital. Not to mention minor points like the increased quality that comes from minimal enlargement.

2. Cost. When I can get a 5x4 digital back with a 25 year guarantee and free replacement when it breaks for £800 I'll get one. That's the point at which equipment costs will exceed my estimated film and prcoessing costs.

3. From the above, you'll gather that I see camera movements as essential for what I do. So far as I know, no digital camera has them - I'd need a digital back.

4. Prejudice. Not against digital per se but against relying on batteries. I do use battery powered exposure meters, but I can judge exposure well enough to not worry if a battery runs out. My preferred cameras are totally mechanical.

Some of the reasons given in the first post for preferring digital simply don't apply to me. I don't need high ISOs - I haven't used anything higher than 125 for a very long time (possibly the early 1970s).

I haven't personally found digital easier, although that comes down to experience I suppose. I find myself always fighting the autofocus which doesn't want to focus on what I want sharp, and to be honest I don't see why I should have to. The viewfinders on most DSLRs that I've seen have been miserable affairs, hardly fit for the purpose in my opinion.

As to taking hundreds of pics today - well, I'm not such a good photographer as you. I have sometimes come back from a fortnight in Scotland with only a dozen or so exposures made. I expect with more practice I could up my exposure rate though....
 
Ah, but it's the vision thing - I don't see hundreds of wonderful images in a day that I want to record. With more experience and as I get better I can aspire to that :)
 
:LOL:
Steve Smith said:
Can't it be both?!!


Steve.
Click to expand...

Yes, almost certainly. (y)

Sectionate said:
It means the thread is over. Rob has spoken. It has been Hooley'd.

(For Fun is his explanation of shooting film)
Click to expand...

Thank you, every day I learn something new is a good day.

TheBigYin said:
:LOL: the </thread> is just "IT Geek" shortcode for "this is the end of the thread"

I Assume you can work out the rest of it ;)
Click to expand...

I see, Rob is a geek in so many differing areas, but assuming I can work out anything for myself has proven the downfall of many a brave man.
 
Last edited:
I shoot film to be moody, artistic and irresistible to girls and camp dancers...:cool:
 
post-83083-0-92350600-1374459317.gif
 
StephenM said:
Ah, but it's the vision thing - I don't see hundreds of wonderful images in a day that I want to record. With more experience and as I get better I can aspire to that :)
Click to expand...

I've actually found the opposite, the more experience I gain the less I shoot which is why film suits me so much better now than it did 10 years ago. Back when I started I'd just machine gun stuff and hope something half decent came from it, I also wasn't very selective in what I chose to show people. As I've gained more experience (and I'm sure maturing as a person has a lot to do with it as well) I've become much more selective in both what I shoot and what I upload to places like Flickr. I might reel off a few more shots on digital than I would on film in certain circumstances but I'm still very selective in actually showing them, if they don't 'feel' right to me then they're banished to my hard drives for the immediate future.

Also the more of something you do the less special it becomes. These days I'm more than happy spending a day shooting round London and only coming away with 5 images that genuinely mean something to me and I'm proud to say I made rather than 200 images that are pretty average overall. There probably isn't a photographer on the planet who can claim to make several hundred truly special images in a day!
 
If digital isn't better, why has it almost taken over completely? :clap:
 
The idea of shooting film really appeals to me. I like the idea of taking my time over the composition and going "back to basics" so to speak. That said, I also think it would be really difficult but much more rewarding when you receive the prints through the post and find out you managed to nail the shot (of more often than not, ruin it!).

There are some good watches regarding film here if anyone is interested: http://www.youtube.com/user/framedshow/videos

and just the whole back-to-basics nature

Edit: Actually, there is a Cannon A1 + about 4 old lenses which are sitting in the loft which haven't been used in over 15 years (family members). Maybe I should dig it out and give it a go one day.
 
Last edited:
4wd said:
If digital isn't better, why has it almost taken over completely? :clap:
Click to expand...

You've clearly never seen a drum scan from a pin sharp medium format frame, it makes my Canon 5Dmk2 look like a Fisher-Price toy for 10 year olds.

If you think digital's better purely on the basis that it's more popular than film then I'd respectfully suggest you do rather a lot more research. ;)
 
PMN said:
You've clearly never seen a drum scan from a pin sharp medium format frame, it makes my Canon 5Dmk2 look like a Fisher-Price toy for 10 year olds.
Click to expand...

Especially so when you're behind the 5D :D
 
Because I want to. And I guess because we (f&c) want to.

Surely that's an /end thread :)
 
Ignoring colour, I've yet to see a black and white digital print that comes close to the beauty and depth of a wet print.

Messing around in the darkroom is a lot of fun for me. Sure I can't achieve the kind of manipulation that would take seconds in photoshop, but the sense of achievement from simple dodging and burning to improve a print is so superior to the lazy use of a slider in PS.

To me there is an honesty to film I find lacking in digital. The ease to which a digital image can be manipulated and pixels changed means that the truth of an image is diminished. Of course film can be manipulated too, but not as easily and skillessly as digital.

And old cameras look so damn cool too
 
If something like this thread had happened in any other section it would have descended into a slanging match ages ago, ban hammers everywhere. We, on the other hand, have remained civilised and just answered the OP's question honestly.....WE ROCK....:banana::banana::banana:
 
Steven001 said:
The idea of shooting film really appeals to me. I like the idea of taking my time over the composition and going "back to basics" so to speak. That said, I also think it would be really difficult but much more rewarding when you receive the prints through the post and find out you managed to nail the shot (of more often than not, ruin it!).
Click to expand...

Like all photography should be?

Steven001 said:
There are some good watches regarding film here if anyone is interested: http://www.youtube.com/user/framedshow/videos

and just the whole back-to-basics nature

Edit: Actually, there is a Cannon A1 + about 4 old lenses which are sitting in the loft which haven't been used in over 15 years (family members). Maybe I should dig it out and give it a go one day.
Click to expand...

That one day is now. Get on with it. I'm at an age where my peers regularly tell me not to put off doing things: this advice is just as good for the under 60s.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top