RetCapt Loc: NorCal mountains

Ilford's (via Blenheim Orange) points duly noted. But that is as far as it goes for me.

Going way back, I was omniscient enough to see that this digital fad would soon die out, and film, as it should, would survive this temporary technical infatuation. I really stuck to my guns on this, secure in the knowledge, by ignoring reality, that I was right. Ultimately reality caught up and I learned my omniscience was not. This happened in 2009-10. By that time I came into a mature technology.

I quickly learned that I could make far superior 35mm prints (in color no less!) than I could order from the custom lab. I also learned I could rely on that because I had the ability to see my images before I even left the scene. I could shoot in color, then convert to black and white in post. so no changing films or carrying multiple bodies. I could experiment and practice as much as I want, and it cost nothing until such time as I booted up my printer. Those elements of experimentation and practice have done more to improve my photography than anything else I have ever done. I have had the unlimited ability to learn as much as I wanted. I am still leaning.

My printer sits on my desk next to my computer. That is now my darkroom.

I don't think I have lost a thing by not having to do the work film photography requires. I have never felt the need to have something that forces me to slow down. I have gotten countless digital images that I would not have gotten with film because I could react so much more quickly to unanticipated opportunities. I don't need to slow down to enjoy the photographic experience. The photographic experience is enhanced for me because I know if there is something of photographic value to capture, I am going to get it.

I am getting far superior image quality in far larger prints that I ever did with 35mm film. My printer goes to 13X19". My beautiful old Leitz Focomat 1C enlarger with an El Nikkor lens would not even enlarge that far on the easel. If I wanted that size I would have to reverse the head and project to the floor. That is because 35mm film was not expected to allow quality prints to be made at that degree of enlargement. Now I get outstanding digital prints to 11X14" and sometimes larger, from small sensor cameras, if the light is good enough and I do my job. APS-C and full frame are capable far beyond this size, because they are digital.

I no longer believe the earth is flat. I no longer listen to vinyl discs on tube amps. I no longer shoot with film.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

The first obvious difference between film and digital is that there are many more format choices above full frame (35mmm) or a handful of "medium format" digital sensors. There are few (if any) film formats below 24x36mm but lots of smaller digital sensors. The extra choices that larger film formats provide have to do with capturing more detail as the format sizes increase. Larger formats make tilts and shifts practical.

The next real difference is in the range of ISO sensitivity. Digital can go much higher than film but film can be used at much lower ISO settings than digital. Both extremes have some advantages.

The differences we are most familiar with are the processing steps from capture to finished product. Film is more complex and, to some, more fun. Digital processing is actually a lot simpler although it can still baffle anyone who does not understand the technology.

Since film can be scanned, the end process can be the same for both. But for some die-hard practitioners, wet printing can also be fun.

Once you are familiar with these basic differences, the choice of film vs. digital can be reduced to a matter of convenience and cost.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

I too can get better digital full frame (24x36mm) prints than I got with scanned 35mm film. But I still can't achieve the quality I was getting from medium and large format film.

I don't personally print larger than 17x25" but I have had some prints made from scanned film at much larger sizes. The advantage of medium and large format film is clear.

BebuLamar

I am sure he is the fossil and I think he likes that best.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

JMHO but no one who shoots wildlife would ever willingly go back to film

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Everyone has a photographic memory. Most don't have any film loaded.

MJPerini

There are analog revivals everywhere, Photography, Music, woodworking with hand tools and lots of other crafts.
People miss the involvement, producing work with Heart head and hands. There is participation in the process and a deep sense of involvement. It is a real thing, and in some ways a re-discovery, in other ways a respite from the unseen digital world.
It is not necessarily about better or worse, nor is it a competition.
There IS an aspect of analog being 'trendy', which is OK but I am more talking about people pursuing it for deeper reasons.... the physical connection to the production of a creative or useful thing.
Most of my Photographic life was analog, (probably like many here) I still own view cameras from 4x5 to 11x14"
I miss the tactile nature of it, but I am one who has moved to digital because it is far easier, and in most objective respects Better. But I am also a woodworker , gardener etc . We send our grand children to schools where every kid plays a musical instrument, they do gardening, painting and drawing as part of the curriculum.
They also participate in the digital world, but with balance.
I love technology, it has made all our lives better, we fully participate, but also enforce a balance.
So I understand the affection for, and attraction to the analog world .....it's all good.......

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

hmmmm...I'm from Brooklyn, but not sure if I am a hipster...I probably have some film DNA in me.... :))))

RetCapt Loc: NorCal mountains

Despite my preference for digital photography, I still respect the old ways and have no disagreement for those who pursue them.

Despite living in Calif, we live in an isolated, sparsely populated mountain region. It was part of the Calif gold rush and there is a lot of history here, which I greatly enjoy.

Just over a pass to the north of us is a mountain valley which has cattle ranches dating back to the 1860s. These ranchers are still raising cattle. If technology has brought any changes, they are not visible. Going there is a step back into the old west. Those ranchers, who are always good for a friendly wave, are more than just ranchers; they are stewards of the land. They know they have to protect and respect the land if it is to sustain them and their families for future generations. At the county fair there I have watched their children competing in the various livestock events, with their parents fully involved.
These ranches are full family commitments.

I come away from that valley, which is unknown to most people, and that county fair, with the warm feeling that something of immense value emerges from what these people are doing in ways they have been doing so for the last 160 years.

So while I prefer digital photography, I have great respect for those who choose to do things in old ways.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The best thing about film is your memories get better even if the pictures didn't.

NickGee Loc: Pacific Northwest

More thoughts from a mind about as narrow as a limp ... um ... noodle.

User ID

Not only narrow minded but quite cynical and arogant, not suffering fools easily. Thaz what comes of knowing this stuff inside out, upside down, forwards and backwards. My mind *is* narrow, in that its just not broad enuf to lend credence to crackpot notions from stuff shirts. Nevertheless they do raise the entertainment quotient and greatly help maintain the advert revenue, so its beneficial to see them always getting all wound up about their "issues".

Dont happen to know whether you ever use film. I do like what little Ive seen of your BW images but acoarst its no concern to me how you produce them. Everybody juggles scenes and processes however their own unique bag of tricks leads to a result.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

I guess I am one of those who documents rather than creates.

You make an excellent point about the "general dissatisfaction with accumulation of stuff that societies have bought as the secret to happiness." So much of the stuff sold now is shoddy and throwaway.

I documented some Seersucker sedge in bloom today, so I'm happy. It comes and goes so quickly that I always miss it in bloom.

User ID

The act of documenting something is just one excuse for making images. Any excuse is just as good as the next. If your documentation is also *interpretive*, then you are creating as well as documenting. One need not proceed from a blank canvas to be creative. OTOH, if you dont really care to interpret your subject then yes, youre a straight up documentarian.

And as a documentarian, you would have no reason to play with film. Digital suits the job. Just imagine the Hubbel parachuting tons of Ektachrome down to JPL every day !

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Much of the article focuses on the resurgence of vinyl in the music industry. Somewhere between 6 and 8% of total music sales -- that's HUGE. Fun fact: A full 50% of those buying vinyl don't own turntables. I won't even begin to speculate as to what their problem is.

Music is a major part of my life -- considered it as a career long ago, and listening to music now is of daily critical importance to me. The deprivation and impoverishment I would experience if I had to rely on vinyl is intolerable to imagine.


Wow, kind of feel sorry for that poor photographer. Maybe if they learned photography it wouldn't be so hard. Anyway I find it enjoyable and pretty easy, maybe because I switched to digital decades ago. I regularly enjoy taking photos that film photographers can't take at all and there's no way I'd give that up so I could instead enjoy the suffering and drudgery of an antiquated medium that can't deliver when I want to take a photograph.