Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
Today, I managed to buy 50 more rolls of film (40 in 35mm and 10 more in 120). Shooting this will bring my household 35mm film consumption up to 100 rolls in the past calendar year - which is more than I would have shot in a couple of years when film cameras were life's only option.
Owning an M240 and an M246, there is nothing that recommends the performance of 35mm negative film. ProImage 100 is slow, Ultramax is grainy; Ektar is testy; TMY is noisy. I don't really have the time to scan any of this on anything higher-res than a Pakon 135 plus. There is attrition in negative development. I miss a lot of pictures, critically of my own children. I have more 35mm film gear than I reasonably need.
Yet here we are. Why? Did I imprint on Konica SLRs? Do I associate Fuji G690s with old memories?* What is it? Does this happen to you?
Dante
*I actually use the Fujis for commercial purposes, where they deliver crushingly high resolution, so maybe that's not irrational.
Owning an M240 and an M246, there is nothing that recommends the performance of 35mm negative film. ProImage 100 is slow, Ultramax is grainy; Ektar is testy; TMY is noisy. I don't really have the time to scan any of this on anything higher-res than a Pakon 135 plus. There is attrition in negative development. I miss a lot of pictures, critically of my own children. I have more 35mm film gear than I reasonably need.
Yet here we are. Why? Did I imprint on Konica SLRs? Do I associate Fuji G690s with old memories?* What is it? Does this happen to you?
Dante
*I actually use the Fujis for commercial purposes, where they deliver crushingly high resolution, so maybe that's not irrational.
seany65
Well-known
I think it's possible that we are.
We can fiddle with cameras all the time, even when not taking photos but what can we do with film?
We can smell it and feel it and see it before and after it's trapped in the camera but what can we do while it's in there? Protect it from light until we want to expose it.
We can of course think about and discuss film and how to treat it/ what to do with it, but we can't really fiddle with it while watching the tv or listening to the radio etc.
So I think cameras have more of a 'do' thing going on, whereas film has more of a 'be' thing going on.
We can fiddle with cameras all the time, even when not taking photos but what can we do with film?
We can smell it and feel it and see it before and after it's trapped in the camera but what can we do while it's in there? Protect it from light until we want to expose it.
We can of course think about and discuss film and how to treat it/ what to do with it, but we can't really fiddle with it while watching the tv or listening to the radio etc.
So I think cameras have more of a 'do' thing going on, whereas film has more of a 'be' thing going on.
gdeprest
Newbie
You sure take great pictures though.
nickjb
Nick Bedford
I think you're right in a lot of ways. When I use my Leica M 240 nowadays, I don't feel much sense of "work" in comparison to the Leica M7 I have. I can't load film into the M, advance the frame, rewind it, chuck the roll into my bag and move on. None of that's part of digital 
With the M 240, I turn the camera on and... click the shutter? Most of the work is done for me, and I now find myself missing the film process. I barely seem to want to use it.
It's bizarre, because I'm a stickler for high quality images at the far end of the process, but now I would sooner use a film camera and get low-res Pakon scans than shoot with a 24mp Leica M.
Film photography is somewhat irrational
Digital VSCO Film
Kodak Portra 160
With the M 240, I turn the camera on and... click the shutter? Most of the work is done for me, and I now find myself missing the film process. I barely seem to want to use it.
It's bizarre, because I'm a stickler for high quality images at the far end of the process, but now I would sooner use a film camera and get low-res Pakon scans than shoot with a 24mp Leica M.
Film photography is somewhat irrational
Digital VSCO Film
Kodak Portra 160
trix4ever
Well-known
Gee I'm mixed about this, after all this time I still love film and have a love/hate relationship with digital.
When my D810 goes I will only have one digital body, a Leica M240 which I really bought to go with my film leicas and lenses.
I have canon p and 7, the two leica m's, nikon F, F2A, F3, Rolleiflex 3.5e3, SWC Hassy, GSW690 III, Cambo wide 65, Linhof Technika III, Sinar Norma and I'm looking for an 8x10 back for the sinar. I have a darkroom and frankly love developing and printing, hate scanning.
I guess from my list of film cameras you can deduce I love film cameras, but truthfully I love film too. Hence my website address!
I also think it is probably irrational that I like film so much and partly that I started my first darkroom at age 14, am now 59 and have never NOT had a darkroom. I actually regard digital as having been very disruptive to my life of photography and wish I'd been such a stick in the mud like say Michael Kenna and stuck with the same film gear all the way through and just ignored digital, but I write for several magazines and digital is just plain easier, and expected.
By the way Dante, I loved your old website and am slowly getting to like your new one, thanks, Mark
http://filmisadelight.com
When my D810 goes I will only have one digital body, a Leica M240 which I really bought to go with my film leicas and lenses.
I have canon p and 7, the two leica m's, nikon F, F2A, F3, Rolleiflex 3.5e3, SWC Hassy, GSW690 III, Cambo wide 65, Linhof Technika III, Sinar Norma and I'm looking for an 8x10 back for the sinar. I have a darkroom and frankly love developing and printing, hate scanning.
I guess from my list of film cameras you can deduce I love film cameras, but truthfully I love film too. Hence my website address!
I also think it is probably irrational that I like film so much and partly that I started my first darkroom at age 14, am now 59 and have never NOT had a darkroom. I actually regard digital as having been very disruptive to my life of photography and wish I'd been such a stick in the mud like say Michael Kenna and stuck with the same film gear all the way through and just ignored digital, but I write for several magazines and digital is just plain easier, and expected.
By the way Dante, I loved your old website and am slowly getting to like your new one, thanks, Mark
http://filmisadelight.com
Dogman
Mentor
So whatever happened to that "digital back" we were supposed to get that snaps into our Leica M's?
Mute-on
Well-known
Well, I am certainly addicted to film cameras. Quite frankly, I find digital cameras have no substance, no soul. I suspect if I had never used a film camera I wouldn’t feel that way.
As for film photos themselves, particularly those of family, I suspect my bias is that film seems permanent whilst digital seems temporary. I don’t want my photos of family to be any less permanent than my family itself.
Archived negatives will likely survive the digital media in use for the next 50 years. Scary huh?!
As for film photos themselves, particularly those of family, I suspect my bias is that film seems permanent whilst digital seems temporary. I don’t want my photos of family to be any less permanent than my family itself.
Archived negatives will likely survive the digital media in use for the next 50 years. Scary huh?!
JPD
Retina and Rollei user
I have more old mechanical cameras than I can use. It's a hobby in itself. I can hold and admire them, the technology and workmanship. Can't do that with film, but without film the cameras can't be used. To admire the qualities of a film you'll have to look at the prints instead of the film itself.
Digital files give me the uneasy feeling of them existing in limbo. They can't be seen or touched. They can get corrupted and deleted with a simple click.
Digital files give me the uneasy feeling of them existing in limbo. They can't be seen or touched. They can get corrupted and deleted with a simple click.
Archiver
Mentor
Well, I love film cameras as mechanical devices and fondling experiences. There's very little mechanically that beats the feeling, sound and smell (yes, smell) of well kept cameras from the 60s and 70s, and derivative designs.
When I look at the rolls from my film cameras, I sometimes berate myself mildly for not paying more attention to composition. After all, every frame costs more money with film, whereas once you've paid for a digital camera, you've prepaid for every image you'll take with it.
Film itself is a mixed bag. I enjoy the look of film images but am very aware of their limitations under a lot of circumstances. My digital cameras produce technically superior images, even the m43 or 1" sensor cameras lacking only in dynamic range. Of course, there's all the convenience of digital, from liveview exposure and storage to processing and labeling/metadata which makes it much easier to shoot.
When I look at the rolls from my film cameras, I sometimes berate myself mildly for not paying more attention to composition. After all, every frame costs more money with film, whereas once you've paid for a digital camera, you've prepaid for every image you'll take with it.
Film itself is a mixed bag. I enjoy the look of film images but am very aware of their limitations under a lot of circumstances. My digital cameras produce technically superior images, even the m43 or 1" sensor cameras lacking only in dynamic range. Of course, there's all the convenience of digital, from liveview exposure and storage to processing and labeling/metadata which makes it much easier to shoot.
JoeLopez
Well-known
Today, I managed to buy 50 more rolls of film (40 in 35mm and 10 more in 120). Shooting this will bring my household 35mm film consumption up to 100 rolls in the past calendar year - which is more than I would have shot in a couple of years when film cameras were life's only option.
Owning an M240 and an M246, there is nothing that recommends the performance of 35mm negative film. ProImage 100 is slow, Ultramax is grainy; Ektar is testy; TMY is noisy. I don't really have the time to scan any of this on anything higher-res than a Pakon 135 plus. There is attrition in negative development. I miss a lot of pictures, critically of my own children. I have more 35mm film gear than I reasonably need.
Yet here we are. Why? Did I imprint on Konica SLRs? Do I associate Fuji G690s with old memories?* What is it? Does this happen to you?
Dante
*I actually use the Fujis for commercial purposes, where they deliver crushingly high resolution, so maybe that's not irrational.
Nice shots - Is that last shot in Greektown (Detroit)?
Ted Striker
Well-known
I shoot film for exactly the same reason why I drive a manual transmission car; because it takes skill to get right.
Pioneer
Mentor
The cameras are certainly a part of it because each of them have their own modes of operation and it can take some time and practice to master the use of each camera.
But for me it is the entire process of film that attracts me. It is like a ritual and each step in that ritual leads to another until you finally have a print in your hands. Each part of the ritual takes practice to master. And even after you have mastered it there is still enough complexity and variables that you can easily flub one of the steps.
I am still working at developing that process, that feeling of mastering a ritual, with digital. I may get there eventually but I am not there yet. I am hoping that one day it will all click because it is another side of photography I would love to master.
But for me it is the entire process of film that attracts me. It is like a ritual and each step in that ritual leads to another until you finally have a print in your hands. Each part of the ritual takes practice to master. And even after you have mastered it there is still enough complexity and variables that you can easily flub one of the steps.
I am still working at developing that process, that feeling of mastering a ritual, with digital. I may get there eventually but I am not there yet. I am hoping that one day it will all click because it is another side of photography I would love to master.
Archiver
Mentor
I think you're on to something. Nothing beats the fondle factor of a good film camera, and the 'novelty' (ha!) of having a couple of rolls of film in the bag. On Christmas day, I took the M9 and M7 with me, along with a couple of smaller digital cameras. The small digitals, with live view and pretty much instant response, produced the most well composed images. The M9 was a joy to use, as always. But the M7 gave a haptic and operational thrill which none of the others had.
I feel that one day, I'm going to get a MP or M-A and shoot a lot more film, really immersing myself in that process. But I don't even do that now with a M7, Contax T3, Pentax ME or Minolta SRT, so why would having a MP or M-A change this? It's as if I like the idea of shooting film more than film itself.
I feel that one day, I'm going to get a MP or M-A and shoot a lot more film, really immersing myself in that process. But I don't even do that now with a M7, Contax T3, Pentax ME or Minolta SRT, so why would having a MP or M-A change this? It's as if I like the idea of shooting film more than film itself.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
It's the photons
It's the photons
Film permanently traps the light that touched the subject, e.g. my kid's face.. forever, on the surface of the film. There is something very simple and physical and real about this for me.
It's the photons
Film permanently traps the light that touched the subject, e.g. my kid's face.. forever, on the surface of the film. There is something very simple and physical and real about this for me.
iphoenix
Well-known
A perfect explanation of what film is.
bmattock
Mentor
I like the fact that the current film camera economic landscape is such that a person of modest means can possess and use cameras and lenses with few restrictions. Curiosity can be indulged with few restrictions.
This permits me to try cameras and lenses touted by others, or legendary kit, or simply things which seem interesting to me.
In addition, I am fascinated and intrigued by well-made mechanical things. I appreciate the craftsmanship of some devices. Watches, for example. Certain firearms. Early vacuum tube technology. Jeeps. And yes, cameras and lenses. But the prices of most camera kit allow me to indulge myself more than other items.
Some here have attempted to shame those who accumulate or collect or 'hoard' kit. I won't be shamed. I enjoy it. I also enjoy photography, but the two are not always the same.
With regard to imprinting, yes. My first slr was a Canon FX my father purchased at a pawnshop. It is my favorite camera to this day.
This permits me to try cameras and lenses touted by others, or legendary kit, or simply things which seem interesting to me.
In addition, I am fascinated and intrigued by well-made mechanical things. I appreciate the craftsmanship of some devices. Watches, for example. Certain firearms. Early vacuum tube technology. Jeeps. And yes, cameras and lenses. But the prices of most camera kit allow me to indulge myself more than other items.
Some here have attempted to shame those who accumulate or collect or 'hoard' kit. I won't be shamed. I enjoy it. I also enjoy photography, but the two are not always the same.
With regard to imprinting, yes. My first slr was a Canon FX my father purchased at a pawnshop. It is my favorite camera to this day.
ptpdprinter
Mentor
I shoot film and digital, and it doesn't take any more skill to get film right than it does to get digital right.
bmattock
Mentor
Agreed.
I am old enough to remember the 'purity' wars over AE and AF. Things have always been thus. We master a skill and now others can do it without having paid tuition. How unfair.
To be honest, something is always lost when automation enters. Whether or not that missing piece matters is up to you.
Those who used to roll their own cigarettes looked with disdain on those who smoked readymades. The difficult to master skill, feeling of accomplishment, and the superlative excellence of the one-handed roll made smoking as much about the enjoyment of the ritual as the actual act of smoking.
Is it not so?
We can choose to use purely manual methods with many digital cameras if we wish. The old disciplines still apply. But in a world of readymades, who does it?
ptpdprinter
Mentor
Lots of people. But it doesn't fit the stereotype film users wish to overlay on digital users, so they deny it. And there are plenty of automated film cameras and people using them, so this whole auto vs manual comparison is a lot of hooie.
bmattock
Mentor
I agree, my comment was meant to be a bit of polite sarcasm. I've often heard the rant that a digital SLR forces people to chimp, to fire machine-gun style, to use autofocus, to use autoexposure, to not, to not, to not...etc.
I have heard it argued so many times, and when it is pointed out to those ranting about it that they can CHOOSE to shoot completely manually, including using manual focus lenses, selecting their ISO, shutter speed, and aperture themselves, and that they can simply NOT LOOK AT the rear display if they do not want to, and they go silent - until the next rant, where they act like none of this was ever said. In other words, they won't argue with you because they know they are wrong, but they also won't admit it.
As I said, I'm old and remember when the exact rants were published in the Letters to the Editor section of photographic magazines when autofocus and ae were introduced to film cameras. NOT REAL PHOTOGRAPHY they wheezed and moaned and puked. Oh well.
I am no kind of purist. I like to shoot film in all kinds of ways, mostly manual but including AE and AF at times. I like to shoot digital the same way. Sometimes I spray and pray, shooting thousands of images at a parade or outdoor event. Sometimes I compose each shot and set my own aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and compose carefully. I even have an old split-focus viewscreen in one of my digital SLR cameras to better help me focus my old manual focus lenses on it.
But none of this matters in this generation where we choose sides and fight for them as if they were sports teams. You cannot enjoy both - you must choose. You have to choose film and be on the side of goodness and right, or choose digital, spray and pray your shots, chimp your results, suck and have no soul. You cannot do both, you cannot appreciate the advantages of both methods.
It becomes religion, and you know with religion, you must hate the other side, whatever that may be.