Why Shoot Film?
Mar 16, 2021 12:18:49 #
In the digital age of photography, why should anyone still shoot film? I'm sure there are many valid reasons- some practical and some nostalgic, artistic/technical, or emotional.
After transitioning to digital in my professional work, I continued shooting film, for a while, when my digital equipment, at the time, could no accommodate certain assignments. When I require a full complement of view camera movements and/or required maximum resolution for a billboard or phot-mural job, I would go to my 8x10 system and transparency film. Eventually, cameras with higher megapixel counts, perspective contr lenses, and digital conversion to my medium format gear relegated the view camera to the storeroom. Advanced software closed the remaining gap.
I did hang onto various film for portraiture, orthochromatic emulsions for character studies, the film with high red sensitivity for glamour portraits, colour negative films that were designed with portraiture and wedding photography in mind were all-important materials in my toolbox along with some LOVELY warm-tone and textured surfaced chloro-bromide papers sich as Koda Opal and Ektalure, DAF Indiatone, and several German imports. Sadly most of these materials have been discontinued. I really don't mist the "smell" of the darkroom or the "thrill" of watching an image form in the tray but there was a certain level of craftsmanship required to make exceptionally fine prints.
So profess, and rightly so, that there is a certain "look" to film that can not be replicated or recaptured in digital production. I tend to disagree and some of that "look" is coarse grain and other elements that some would consider distraction or defects. Most o the time, in digital production, I can replicate most of the effects I previously attained with film- it's an ongoing learning process.
I can fully understand the value of properly scanning and digitizing existing film negatives and transparencies. Thow who no longer have an operational darkroom or colour lab can continue to archive and print all the negatives and transparencies they made over the years. Aside from using one's favourite film cameras and lenses, what is the advantage of starting new projects or individual shoots with the film only to convert it to digital images? I could understand the concept of shoot film and follow through with a complete darkroom treatment, especially for those practicing the zone system.
Another issue, for me, is the proper development of black and white films. When I was fully engaged in film, my processing technique was extremely critical. I found that many photographers be losing the full potential of their films, as to the accuracy and tight grain structure due to sloppy development techniques. I found that minor reticulation (shifting of the emulsion on the base) happens when there are differentials in temperature between the developer and the other chemicals in the line. Other problems were too much acidity in the stop bath or fixer and unnecessarily long wet-times. Over-emersion in "hypo" eliminator is another detriment. Using moderately slow films, precise temperature control and very careful handling and washing could produce large format-like sharpness from 35mm film. Filtered water used for mixing and diluting chemistry and the wash water or using distilled or demineralized water for mixing chemicals is another essential component. Too vigorous agitation is another cause of quality loss.
So...this is my take on the matter, however, it is certainly not "carved in stone" I would like to hear other opinions and experiences of shooting film and digitizing the negatives or transparencies and/ or continuing the entire darkroom process.
After transitioning to digital in my professional work, I continued shooting film, for a while, when my digital equipment, at the time, could no accommodate certain assignments. When I require a full complement of view camera movements and/or required maximum resolution for a billboard or phot-mural job, I would go to my 8x10 system and transparency film. Eventually, cameras with higher megapixel counts, perspective contr lenses, and digital conversion to my medium format gear relegated the view camera to the storeroom. Advanced software closed the remaining gap.
I did hang onto various film for portraiture, orthochromatic emulsions for character studies, the film with high red sensitivity for glamour portraits, colour negative films that were designed with portraiture and wedding photography in mind were all-important materials in my toolbox along with some LOVELY warm-tone and textured surfaced chloro-bromide papers sich as Koda Opal and Ektalure, DAF Indiatone, and several German imports. Sadly most of these materials have been discontinued. I really don't mist the "smell" of the darkroom or the "thrill" of watching an image form in the tray but there was a certain level of craftsmanship required to make exceptionally fine prints.
So profess, and rightly so, that there is a certain "look" to film that can not be replicated or recaptured in digital production. I tend to disagree and some of that "look" is coarse grain and other elements that some would consider distraction or defects. Most o the time, in digital production, I can replicate most of the effects I previously attained with film- it's an ongoing learning process.
I can fully understand the value of properly scanning and digitizing existing film negatives and transparencies. Thow who no longer have an operational darkroom or colour lab can continue to archive and print all the negatives and transparencies they made over the years. Aside from using one's favourite film cameras and lenses, what is the advantage of starting new projects or individual shoots with the film only to convert it to digital images? I could understand the concept of shoot film and follow through with a complete darkroom treatment, especially for those practicing the zone system.
Another issue, for me, is the proper development of black and white films. When I was fully engaged in film, my processing technique was extremely critical. I found that many photographers be losing the full potential of their films, as to the accuracy and tight grain structure due to sloppy development techniques. I found that minor reticulation (shifting of the emulsion on the base) happens when there are differentials in temperature between the developer and the other chemicals in the line. Other problems were too much acidity in the stop bath or fixer and unnecessarily long wet-times. Over-emersion in "hypo" eliminator is another detriment. Using moderately slow films, precise temperature control and very careful handling and washing could produce large format-like sharpness from 35mm film. Filtered water used for mixing and diluting chemistry and the wash water or using distilled or demineralized water for mixing chemicals is another essential component. Too vigorous agitation is another cause of quality loss.
So...this is my take on the matter, however, it is certainly not "carved in stone" I would like to hear other opinions and experiences of shooting film and digitizing the negatives or transparencies and/ or continuing the entire darkroom process.
Mar 16, 2021 13:23:43 #
I still have most of the good film cameras used in past years, and they work as well as they did then. I have a modest supply of film some expired some not, and all of the elements of a darkroom with a decent space where I could set up adequately for amateur purposes. There is even a good lab I can send film to for processing, printing and / or scanning. And there is just "something" about film that few digital cameras can duplicate, added is nostalgia, recapturing younger days by working with familiar old tools. I will shoot some film on occasion, the darkroom unlikely to ever materialize. Digital is just too convenient. I am in complete control of the process from beginning to end with little fuss, no mess, no chemicals, a considerably lower cost. And the time - so much faster! I can go from captured image to print in a fraction of the time film required. The closest I can come to the monochrome film look is with a little Leica D Lux 109 a friend gave me in exchange for some other camera equipment - very close. Makes me wonder how the results of one of the Leica Monochrome models would compare. With a price of entry just south of $6,000, I'll never know.
Mar 16, 2021 13:40:57 #
I still shoot film because I can't figure out how to put an SD card in my Nikon F100. 
I am currently bidding on a Nikon D610 on eBay so who knows how much longer the F100 will see the light of day. I'll probably never completely quit shooting film...I just love that F100 too much.
I am currently bidding on a Nikon D610 on eBay so who knows how much longer the F100 will see the light of day. I'll probably never completely quit shooting film...I just love that F100 too much.
Mar 17, 2021 15:20:13 #
I still have my first Nikon F with a prism finder, Nikon F with the Tn finder, an F2 and an ancient beat up Bronica S that still works. I haven't shot film for a couple of years now. With reflexes slowing and eyesight failing digital is the only thing that keeps me in the game.
When this forum became active I thought about how much I missed film and decided the attraction was gone. Anybody want to buy a camera?
When this forum became active I thought about how much I missed film and decided the attraction was gone. Anybody want to buy a camera?
Mar 17, 2021 18:02:04 #
OK, so far I have read some good reasons for continuing to shoot film-OR NOT! Some love their old film cameras, others like the "look", many think that film and darkroom work require more craftsmanship, etc. What I would lie to hear is more detail about the "look"- is it gradations, tonality, image tone, grain, the moods that can be created, etc.
Aside from my commercial work, if I were gonna resurrect my old darkroom, stink up the shop, dip my hands in toxic chemicals and possibly give my lovely wife grounds for divorce, I want to have some creative encouragement or motivation, other than "it's fun"!
I still have an enlarger-a Chromega on the extended chassis, 3 Rodenstock lenses on a turret, my old trusty Duplex safelight, and some temperature control gear, secretly stashed away. Shhhhhh!
Aside from my commercial work, if I were gonna resurrect my old darkroom, stink up the shop, dip my hands in toxic chemicals and possibly give my lovely wife grounds for divorce, I want to have some creative encouragement or motivation, other than "it's fun"!
I still have an enlarger-a Chromega on the extended chassis, 3 Rodenstock lenses on a turret, my old trusty Duplex safelight, and some temperature control gear, secretly stashed away. Shhhhhh!
Mar 17, 2021 18:11:00 #
I won't post photos on your thread, but 24 February I posted In the City, some output from the little Leica. That represents about as close a result as I can get to Monochrome film. I do quite a lot of digital black & white, generally with some success, but whatever the "secret sauce" is Leica has got it for me.
Mar 17, 2021 18:38:56 #
flip1948 wrote:
I still shoot film because I can't figure out how to put an SD card in my Nikon F100.
I am currently bidding on a Nikon D610 on eBay so who knows how much longer the F100 will see the light of day. I'll probably never completely quit shooting film...I just love that F100 too much.
I am currently bidding on a Nikon D610 on eBay so who knows how much longer the F100 will see the light of day. I'll probably never completely quit shooting film...I just love that F100 too much.
Update: I won the auction for the D610...yay me!
It's an "excellent" condition USA model with battery grip and a little over 17k shutter count. The auction price was $560 but with shipping and tax came to $604 which is the exact price it would have cost me for the one that was snatched from me on MPB because my stimulus payment hadn't come yet. So I saved the MPB shipping and tax and this one only has 5k clicks more...so I'm pretty satisfied, or will be when it arrives next Thurs.
One thing I did a couple of weeks ago after deciding on the D610 was to get a manual on eBay so I could study up ahead of time and hit the ground running. Tomorrow I'll be picking up a couple of 64gb SD cards at Walmart.
Until it gets here I should probably go shoot a few rolls of film.
Mar 17, 2021 19:52:03 #
quixdraw wrote:
I won't post photos on your thread, but 24 February I posted In the City, some output from the little Leica. That represents about as close a result as I can get to Monochrome film. I do quite a lot of digital black & white, generally with some success, but whatever the "secret sauce" is Leica has got it for me.
I certainly don't mind or object if or when someone posts an image of any of "my" threads. I do not consider that a "hijack"! This is supposed to be a "FORUM," where folks can have an open discussion and compare images and especially to make certain points or illustrate something important. Unless there is a "rule" against it please post your shot or send me a link to it! I do not consider this forum an exclusive personalized showplace for my work. Anything I do not want to share, be criticized or copied, I simply do not post. If anyone wants to show me a better way or a different approach to doing something, with a photograph, I do not consider that upstaging or one-upmanship. I consider it a service or a favour.
If a picture is worth 1000 words, why are photography discussions (here) limited to words- that seems antithetical and downright obtuse!
My old M-3 and 3 Basic lenses were my personal kit during my tour in Vietnam. My "official" cameras were aerial surveillance and reconnaissance gear. I ket it in rubberized ammunition protecting bag in the pocket of my ODs. That came must have been made of iron!
I could not, at the time of my homecoming look at those images without an unpleasant reaction (an understatement) a so I donated all the material, over 600 images, to various archives and veterans associations. Yes, they did have a certain quality that I have not yet replicated in digital. I would love to see what you did.
Mar 17, 2021 20:17:33 #
Thanks. I prefer to err on the side of respect. These are nothing special, just the most current example I have of the Leica D Lux 109 output. https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-687048-1.html. You may guess in the era of the panic-demic my travel has been a bit limited.
Curiously enough, as a boy, I learned on a Leica M3 with a collapsible 50mm a 35mm and a 90mm that were my Fathers. I still have them and use them occasionally to this day, along with a 135 he got years later.
Curiously enough, as a boy, I learned on a Leica M3 with a collapsible 50mm a 35mm and a 90mm that were my Fathers. I still have them and use them occasionally to this day, along with a 135 he got years later.
Mar 18, 2021 00:05:14 #
quixdraw wrote:
Thanks. I prefer to err on the side of respect. These are nothing special, just the most current example I have of the Leica D Lux 109 output. https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-687048-1.html. You may guess in the era of the panic-demic my travel has been a bit limited.
Curiously enough, as a boy, I learned on a Leica M3 with a collapsible 50mm a 35mm and a 90mm that were my Fathers. I still have them and use them occasionally to this day, along with a 135 he got years later.
Curiously enough, as a boy, I learned on a Leica M3 with a collapsible 50mm a 35mm and a 90mm that were my Fathers. I still have them and use them occasionally to this day, along with a 135 he got years later.
Thank you, sir!
Mar 18, 2021 05:33:20 #
I like to process of shooting film but I can't do it myself anymore so I rarely do it now. If I do shoot film now and then it's only color slide film because when I sent slide film out for processed they are processed exactly the same way there is no adjustments to be made there.
I do not like the film look, in fact I never did.
I do not like the film look, in fact I never did.
Mar 18, 2021 19:56:05 #
Film is like driving a manual/stick shift. Digital is like driving an auto.
Some people are happy to move to an auto but there are those who feel if you really want to feel like you are "driving the car", you opt the manual/stick shift.
Same with film and digital. I have always felt greater personal reward achieving a high quality image created with a film camera over one created with a digital camera.
And I really miss pulling the film leader across, closing the camera back and advancing the film to the first frame.
Something about losing this with digital always bothered me! lol
Some people are happy to move to an auto but there are those who feel if you really want to feel like you are "driving the car", you opt the manual/stick shift.
Same with film and digital. I have always felt greater personal reward achieving a high quality image created with a film camera over one created with a digital camera.
And I really miss pulling the film leader across, closing the camera back and advancing the film to the first frame.
Something about losing this with digital always bothered me! lol
Mar 19, 2021 06:29:02 #
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
... Another issue, for me, is the proper development of black and white films. When I was fully engaged in film, my processing technique was extremely critical. ....
Having spent most of my life in a subtropical environment I never fretted about temperature controls for B&W film processing. I always process at room temperature and this is kept within a reasonable range by air conditioning, close to 75°F. I have never had a problem with reticulation.
I adjust my development times for any deviation from that base temperature but I don't fret over the timing of the remaining steps.
Other than maintaining a clean environment and fresh chemicals I don't worry about the results. I scan my negatives so my darkroom requirements are minimal.
Color is another matter since development times and temperatures are critical. For 30 years I used a very reliable local lab in Coral Gables to develop my color film but since I moved away I have turned to digital for color.
Mar 19, 2021 08:50:55 #
selmslie wrote:
Having spent most of my life in a subtropical envi... (show quote)
I agree with you although I have done both C41 and E6 they are both more expensive and less desirable than having the labs do it. I did a lot of RA-4 processing though because that is where I need controls.
The reasons why they are more expensive? I do not reuse the chemicals because you lose consistency when reusing chemicals. Also even though I have precise temperature of the chemicals before pouring into the tank the temperature drops after the chemicals are poured in. So it's not as precise as the labs can do it.
Mar 19, 2021 09:41:11 #
BebuLamar wrote:
I agree with you although I have done both C41 and... (show quote)
I had a Jobo CPE-2 for a while. The best I can say about it is that it worked very well. I used it for negative and positive small, medium and large format film.
The downside was that it was expensive and it would have been a long time before I could break even, if ever.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.