I was one of the last — if not THE last — in my peer group to finally go digital. I’d been shooting film for forty years. For me, the joy of photography was always in the darkroom.
“When you’re shooting, it’s all over in a sixtieth of a second,” I would say, “but in the darkroom you can spend hours, even days working with an image.”
I have fond memories of my film & darkroom days, but I don’t miss them. Today, I easily spend just as much time post-processing RAW files as I ever did with an enlarger + trays, giving the same satisfaction. And I am putting out way more images.
Great photos. I too have many old film cameras, mostly from Soviet era -- Kiev, Zorky, Smena -- but I was never able to take good photos using them. I still use my Konica rangefinder occasionally; but I don't process my own film, so between the film cost and the processing fees, it gets quite expensive. I do love the look of an expired Kodak color film, though. I'll keep using it until I run out of money. :)
Being 78 years old and been making photos from early 1960s, I don't miss the film experience. I still have my Pentax ME Supper 35mm camera and a handful of lenses. I'm not tempted in the slightest to pull it out. I never did any of my own processing, so maybe if I had it might have more of an allure. I actually shot more slide film than print. So in a way, I was even digital back then (using a projector to show my pics).
As an ammeter I started photography in the film era. I use digital for work related images. But I am old school and still prefer the film process from start to finish and I cannot agree that a digital black & white print is the same quality as a film silver gelatin print. It is not my profession and I must bow down to those who spend ther life in a wet darkroom and in that I do agree that digital is better in that sense.
Funny but I don't miss film and film processing at all. I had a commercial studio for 35 years and I can't even imagine how many rolls and sheets of film I processed, many thousands I am sure. I had an E6 dip and dunk line, another for C-41. Black and white was done in NIKKOR tanks for roll film and sheet film was dip and dunk in those old Kodak black rubber tanks. My hands always smelled like stop bath or fixer. I had 4 enlargers to print negatives from 35mm to 8 x 10. I was a one man shop for the most part so I shot all day and processed at night, contact prints were delivered to the client the next morning. Then they ordered prints.
I do agree, you had to be more careful planning your shots based on film supplies. I hated when a client out on location would say, "while we are at it let's shoot it another way" which had me busy counting the unused film in my bag to make sure I had enough. Sure is a lot easier with digital in that regard.
For years many of us had no choice but film. The flexibility, mobility and multidimensional personality that we the photographer can apply in digital can never be duplicated in film. Film is nostalgic but so limiting compared to what is available today. Its a great article Anthony, but I'm sticking with my Sony and Lightroom.
Nice. The allure of film isn't due to the results though.
I was one of the last — if not THE last — in my peer group to finally go digital. I’d been shooting film for forty years. For me, the joy of photography was always in the darkroom.
“When you’re shooting, it’s all over in a sixtieth of a second,” I would say, “but in the darkroom you can spend hours, even days working with an image.”
I have fond memories of my film & darkroom days, but I don’t miss them. Today, I easily spend just as much time post-processing RAW files as I ever did with an enlarger + trays, giving the same satisfaction. And I am putting out way more images.
Great photos. I too have many old film cameras, mostly from Soviet era -- Kiev, Zorky, Smena -- but I was never able to take good photos using them. I still use my Konica rangefinder occasionally; but I don't process my own film, so between the film cost and the processing fees, it gets quite expensive. I do love the look of an expired Kodak color film, though. I'll keep using it until I run out of money. :)
Being 78 years old and been making photos from early 1960s, I don't miss the film experience. I still have my Pentax ME Supper 35mm camera and a handful of lenses. I'm not tempted in the slightest to pull it out. I never did any of my own processing, so maybe if I had it might have more of an allure. I actually shot more slide film than print. So in a way, I was even digital back then (using a projector to show my pics).
As an ammeter I started photography in the film era. I use digital for work related images. But I am old school and still prefer the film process from start to finish and I cannot agree that a digital black & white print is the same quality as a film silver gelatin print. It is not my profession and I must bow down to those who spend ther life in a wet darkroom and in that I do agree that digital is better in that sense.
Funny but I don't miss film and film processing at all. I had a commercial studio for 35 years and I can't even imagine how many rolls and sheets of film I processed, many thousands I am sure. I had an E6 dip and dunk line, another for C-41. Black and white was done in NIKKOR tanks for roll film and sheet film was dip and dunk in those old Kodak black rubber tanks. My hands always smelled like stop bath or fixer. I had 4 enlargers to print negatives from 35mm to 8 x 10. I was a one man shop for the most part so I shot all day and processed at night, contact prints were delivered to the client the next morning. Then they ordered prints.
I do agree, you had to be more careful planning your shots based on film supplies. I hated when a client out on location would say, "while we are at it let's shoot it another way" which had me busy counting the unused film in my bag to make sure I had enough. Sure is a lot easier with digital in that regard.
But I did enjoy the article!
For years many of us had no choice but film. The flexibility, mobility and multidimensional personality that we the photographer can apply in digital can never be duplicated in film. Film is nostalgic but so limiting compared to what is available today. Its a great article Anthony, but I'm sticking with my Sony and Lightroom.