3 Problems with Film Photography

[Headin_South]

Spent a lovely day on Dartmoor a few weeks ago, shot a roll of fp4+ in a 6x6 Zeiss ikon folder and half a roll of hp5+ 35mm in my Pentax spotmatic. I visited some places I've never been before, got some fresh air and excercise and the dog had a great day too. Total cost around £150, including buying the cameras, diesel in the truck, developing chemicals and the film. Take the cameras away and I spent thirty quid tops. That's not the cheapest hobby, but it's a lot better value than pretty much any other hobby you can think of. Film, it's just a load more fun.

[JohnKrill]

I have used film cameras since 1958. Yes, I’m an old geyser. You hit the target. I had a Leica M3 for decades but when I purchased my first autofocus and auto exposure camera my old Nikon f and that manual focus/exposure M3 went in a drawer somewhere. I later bought a Contex G1. It’s now my go to film camera. I bought it in 2006 and I’m still waiting for it to die.
I don’t make prints in a darkroom any more because getting really fine prints can take years to master. I do process my film myself and then make contacts sheets in the darkroom but then scan the negative I want to print.
I use only Tri-X film. I have used Tri-X for decades and I can determine exposure manually if necessary.
Film photography is my way of relaxing. Digital is for work. Digital from camera to print is so much faster and more efficient. Plus the prints are so much better.

[nobodytoomusic]

Solid points in this video, but what always gets lost in the discussion about film is not even about the final image, it's the process itself. You can never replicate the feeling of shooting a film camera; loading the film, manually setting exposure, manually focusing, etc. Then there's developing and printing in the darkroom. The art of photography and the art of "making a photo" is tied within the legacy of the technology of film. No matter how good digital software gets at emulating the "film look, " it can never recreate the manual process. And I'm sorry, there is nothing sexy or fun about loading a battery or sd card into a digital camera, or staring at a monitor for hours editing photos. As useful as digital cameras can be sometimes, (and they do have their place), the joy of photography is in the analog process imo.

[aprilroselilleyman]

Everything you said in this video is so accurate!! I'm tired of seeing film photographers mediocre work and being told it's amazing, that they are so talented etc etc simply because it's shot on film. The format does not make one a good photographer, yet I see certain people gaining recognition for boring images? It blows my mind. There are so many underrated artists out there..
I used to work in a film lab and would encounter the same cliche images of hot skinny girls in bikini's everyday. Those photographs were apparently 'art' and the so called photographers were 'well known' and 'respected'. I'm sorry, but shooting an already beautiful subject looking vacant does not qualify as talent/skill - instead the photographer is relying on the appeal of sex and the style/look of film to get them by.

[ManuelGuzmanPhotography]

Finally someone is saying it. Too many people think loving film means you can't acknowledge its short comings. Also typing this out while you're trashing r/analog - just reminded me about a photo I saw on tumblr: a piece of bread on a set of stairs, which people were applauding because of how the light was hitting it...

[faranji]

Yes, Cinestill is rebranded Vision3 packaged for cross-processing and priced high. But it's generating interest in film photography. Would you really rather it wasn't around? I'm more worried about the day there isn't any hype around film or cameras.

[AndrewJacksonSE]

Even at the inflated prices of today there are still bargains - last summer I picked up an EOS 500 for 200 SEK (about 20 USD) including shipping, a Canonet and Konica C35 for about the same each. There are still good deals out there, just don’t fall for the instagram gear posing.

[evanduffy]

My local camera store has cinestill 50D and 800T for $13 for a 135 36exp roll which I think is not horrendous since removing the remjet allows you to send it to a C41 lab without ruining their equipment. Once I get ahold of some C41 chems and a bulk roller I’ll buy a 100ft roll of Vision3 500T but until then I don’t mind paying a 3-4$ premium to shoot the same stock from cinestill

[avcle]

This should be a TED talk, nothing but the truth 🙌🏽

[dxps]

RE: Sharpness, or Resolution
Film can have amazing resolving power, given the right set of conditions - low ISO, perfect light, stabilized equipment (tripods etc), and most of all - High quality lenses. Add to that things like professional processing, drum scanning and post-processing - and you'll quickly see the 'price per megapixel' for film is out of control.

Similar, if not better results can be had from even APS-C sensors if the same technique and thought is applied as a film exposure. But, because as you said - you can hold down the shutter on a digital all day and not spend a penny - people do not pay attention to the basics and just 'pray and spray' - giving Digital photography it's undeserved reputation.

[totalrecone]

Total agreement. I personally, get so tired of the 'Tesla Car Effect' of some film brands, as it appears that being part of the clique is more important than the end result. I have passed off photos as being shot with Tri X when actually Fomapan 200 was used just to see how the opinion of the viewer is effected by perception. Ultimately, it doesn't mean a fig what was used to make that image, but what that image IS.

[hawkman]

I got into film photography in the early 2000’s, and am just getting back into it. What draws me to photography, both analog and digital, is the process of making good photos. The photo itself is raw data, and takes an investment of time and money to make it a photograph.

[AlexOnStreets]

I was born in '85 and had plenty of "experience" shooting point and shoots as a kid. Fast forward to today at 36 and yes I am part of this new trend of recent film shooters. Own a Leica, adore it. Enjoy cinestill. Camera scan everything un-ironically. I am exactly who you are describing as the base.

Now here's where I am different and or disagree. While I am a professional portrait and street photographer, I take many many meaningful photos. I also take plenty of meaningless photos too though. And while the smartphone would suffice it's the quality of the film that gives meaningless photos more artistic merit. So I know exactly what you mean by people wasting film on tropes and such but sometimes that gas station really looks dumb on a smartphone and amazing on film. Sue me 😂 But common you know it does too. Don't fight it! haha.. but really you kinda already admitted this so I know. I just wanted to give my similar 2 cents.

Ok one more point.. (don't want to be that guy who nit picks sorry) But judging a camera based on the lack of autofocus? Hmm I think you need to consider so many factors before autofocus or manual focus is in question. Me I could never rely on autofocus with the work I do. I need manual focus. It's all relative isn't it? I think you know this but were just making a slight joke. I really liked a lot of your points though. Keep it coming!

[trulsdirio]

To me I shoot film because I like the texture it gives, especially in out of focus areas. I also enjoy the process (most of the time), but the look is what I like most. I almost exclusively shoot black and white tho, as it suits my type of photography and the feeling I want to deliver most.
It is to me more of an interpretation of reality than modern digital, where I find too much clarity and resolution to get my desired result (which usually is making nature seem more magical and mystical).

[henryrogers]

I really enjoyed hearing your opinions in this video, Azriel. Insightful, and I agree with the points you made. For me, of course it’s the entire process from start to finish in shooting with my 35mm film SLRs. Also the nostalgia, the design, engineering and classic beauty that goes into the craftsmanship of these cameras. The oohs and ahs and people coming up to me and admiring my Nikon F and my Canon FTb hung around my neck and asking questions about my cameras, even posing for me! And the final result, seeing the prints I get back from my lab and scanning the negatives into my computer with my Epson V600 film scanner. I’m 65 and have been shooting digital for about 20 years but have recently discovered my passion for film photography about a year and a half ago. I now shoot mostly with my 35mm film SLRs, my favorite hobby! I want my photography to get better and better with each roll of film I shoot, and I enjoy studying the greats who came way before me.

[CoffeeandPhotographyTalk]

This is the kind of honest discussion about photography that I seek out on YouTube. Great vid- keep it up, subscribed.

[carbonejack]

Agree with you. Good points. When you're passionate about what to believe, and you tell it straightforwardly, people call it a rant. I know. I rant regularly. I like the way you call things.

[TruePoindexter]

Agreed wholeheartedly. Yes, if you shoot with some Ektar 100 or pretty much any slow speed B&W you can exceed the resolution of digital FF. Bumping up to 120 or large format even more so.... but you have to combine it with expensive and technically challenging scanning and a presentation format that demands that resolution. I've always loved Clyde Butcher's work and the amazing 5 foot plus prints that he was able to make in his darkroom. He needs every tiny bit of resolution he can get. Thinking that you need that same resolution for Instagram is just silly.

For me at least shooting film is about the process. It's a fun challenge to wrestle with the film and cameras from our parents and grandparents to make an image. For anything though where the results matter, I'm going to go with digital hands down. Digital is much more reliable to deliver a final product that is saleable.

TL/DR: My own shooting for fun on the street? Film all the way. Headshots for a client or pro event coverage? Digital 100%.

[PhilKnall]

Everything you said is true, but it doesn't bother me nearly as much. I'm happy people are enjoying themselves. Yes there's much influencer posturing with these things, but us old farts waffling about it won't change anything.
I still don't nearly enjoy digital as much as film, even just the images (and I'm definitely not spending the time lightrooming the heck out of every image to make it that way - film just has a great baseline). Maybe I need to get one of those Fujis!
One thing about the cost point - I don't agree we all need to factor in a dark room. Enjoying film and never touching a developing tank is perfectly fine in my eyes. I did it a few times, but most of the time I just drop them off at a lab. Added cost of course, but I don't feel my photos are any less for it. And while I agree about purely repackaged film, I do like that we are able to use motion picture film without having to do ECN processing thanks to Cinestill.
Anyway, always love your videos! keep em coming!

[tomamyx]

great video... BUT, I must disagree on one point. You said the purpose of photography is to make great photographs, but I thought the purpose of photography was to take pictures. You see, I'm not a great photographer, but I love it anyway. If I may make a poor analogy: I love music, and I love to sing. The problem is I can't carry a tune, but if the whole purpose of singing was to be a great vocalist... well, hopefully you get what I'm trying to convey. My photography is for my satisfaction and if someone (anyone!) else likes a picture I've taken, then I'm even happier. So I'll just keep on being a happy idiot taking my pictures, some good, some bad (well, mostly bad), but all worthwhile. Other than that small point, you were spot on. Thanks!