What percentage of your photography is with film?

[cb1]

1979 to 2001 - 100% all film all the time
2001 to 2013 - 0% digital took over
2013 to present - 50% film makes come back

 

[FujiLove]

100% film apart from the inevitable iPhone pictures (for eBay sales and things like that).

 

[ic-racer]

100%

 

[Oxleyroad]

I'd be more like 85%. The 15% not film based is where I use my cell phone at work to grab images of things gone wrong for illustration purposes in presentations.

 

[OptiKen]

Since this pole is being taken from a select group of people who are in a select group of film shooters anyway, the results are both predictable and not surprising

 

[Sirius Glass]

Since this pole is being taken from a select group of people who are in a select group of film shooters anyway, the results are both predictable and not surprising

Oh no, this is a very scientific poll and it shows that 56% of the people in the world shoot film 100% of the time. This is on internet so we know that it must be true.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Well, it does show that 44% of the people on a film photography website who bothered to respond to the poll also use digital to some extent.

More importantly, it also provides an unassailable argument for reintroducing ASA 25 K II in double 8mm.

 

[Maris]

100% of my picture-making consumes light-sensitive materials. Most of it, say 95%, by area is gelatin-silver photographic paper. Pictures on photographic paper are photographs, aren't they? The rest is camera-original photographic negatives made on sheet film and roll-film.

 

[Cholentpot]

Look at a Nikon Df. It's basically a digital FE. Amazing low light performance too, it has truly changed the way I do night street photography. I can do things that are impossible with film.

I use both digital and film, a full frame 35mm DSLR, and film from 35mm to 8x10. I view each as a tool with strengths and weaknesses and use an appropriate one for the situation and the results I need. No single camera is perfect for every situation.

For example, I recently took apart a copal shutter on an LF lens to repair it. As I took off each screw or part I took a photo using the DLSR. I made sure that I had included everything I wanted in each shot, didn't have glare from the light etc. As I was reassembling the shutter I had the images up on the computer in front of me as a reference. It would have been inappropriate to use film for that, I wanted the instant verification of focus, exposure etc and I don't want to have to make 100 colour prints in the darkroom when I could scroll through images on the computer until I found the view I needed. It's not fine art, it's simply documentation.

On the other hand, if I'm taking a landscape where I know I want to make a print for my wall, it will be the 4x5 or 8x10 - depending upon how far from the car I have to go!

I'm not dogmatic about "everything must be on film "or digital all the way"; I use whatever is the best tool for the job at hand to get the desired results. Sometimes that's a phone, sometimes it's the 8x10.

And I take my metaphorical hat off to Nikon not only for allowing the Df to accept pre-AI lenses, but also for creating a camera that has external controls for all major functions. To me it seems like a digital version of an F4.




Consider the aforementioned Nikon Df or the Fuji X series (e.g. X-Pro2, X-T2, or even X-100). All have external controls reminiscent of fine film cameras from the 1980's-1990's.


Although roughly 98% of my photography is with film, I don't want to be ignorant and ignore new technology. I'm glad that I feel capable and comfortable using any digital camera on the market today, even though my main ones are only the older Fuji X-Pro1 and Nikon D700.

And now, to hustle up some money...

I'll wait a few years until the next versions come out and buy the older ones for far less.

 

[rayonline_nz]

Since this pole is being taken from a select group of people who are in a select group of film shooters anyway, the results are both predictable and not surprising

Yes, that is thing thing I underestimated.
I am in little New Zealand, where the film culture is pretty much mute and accordingly chemistry and film cost 2x, some film and esp color slides cost 3x. Apparatus at the shops are on the bottom shelf and there are even dust on them.

I know one person who focuses on film as much as you guys but he probably manages 10-20 rolls a year only. With printing, he belongs to a group of a good few people (rather than couple of people) with the print developer the group firstly mixes up the fresh chemistry and splits it into a few bottles because they just don't use them enough.

With a more general audience I am like others there, 20% film, and 80% digital.

Color film is getting expensive and in particular where I am, I am also thinking if I should stop that and just do mostly b/w film. Due to more labs and better quality I have been exporting my film to the USA for developing my E6. And like the few film guys here I know we all import fresh film from the USA Fortunately the delivery prices are still quite affordable. But again, while b/w chemistry is still affordable for us we do pay 2x to what you guys pay in the USA ....

 

[skorpiius]

Mine is weird. From April through mid-August, 99% digital as I shoot rollerderby, but outside of those months, probably 80%+ film.

EDIT: instead of 80%+ film in the 'off digital' months, I should say 70% film but 95% of the 'keepers' are from film.

 

[Dwayne Martin]

100% film unless its some iPhone snapshot.

 

[LeftCoastKid]

Something well over 90 per cent with, I'm guesstimating, probably a 65/35 color reversal to black and white negative ratio. The remaining images are created using my D800 or my iPhone. Perusing the former, I notice that, having set the CF/SD cards on Raw/Jpeg, I have images dating from December 2013, through to the present, on the same cards, currently in the camera.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Cell phone and digital cameras are for posting on internet, car or other repair note taking, or reporting problems. Those are images, not photographs and not taken very often.

 

[Leigh B]

100% of my photography is done with film.

I also do some digital imaging in 35mm (Nikon) and MF (Hasselblad), but that's NOT photography.

- Leigh

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

For my serious work, 90%+ is film, less than 10% is digital. There are times and places where the digital device just makes more sense. I'm about to go visit my folks in Florida, and we're going to visit a wildlife sanctuary. I'll take the digital camera because I have a long telephoto zoom for it, and it has a wider range of ISO settings and shutter speeds than I can achieve with a film camera. But on my recent trip to Mexico, where I had no time pressure, and was mostly shooting on the street, I took only film cameras, with one lens each (plus the phone for social media stuff).

 

[sportster44]

Volume wise I shoot more images digitally, I can experiment more with digital. But my daily carry is a couple of film cameras. I, like many started all film, flipped to the dark side and slowly coming back. Two years ago I shot 12 rolls of film, last year 40, this year I'm aiming for 50+

 

[dmr]

I know this will sound like I'm some kind of defector, but for my serious work, it's probably now about 80% {d-word}. Mostly for convenience issues.

The big issue I have is that processing is no way as convenient as it was 10 years ago. Back then I could drop off a roll at Walgreens for a quick DO/CD over lunch and pick it up on my way home. Now I have to take it to a photo lab and they no longer do C41 batches daily. Usually 2-3 days turn-around.

Another thing which REALLY helped me with digital, and I know this sounds stupid but it really helped and changed my whole image of it, was getting one of those little memory card reader widgets to transfer the photos from the memory card to the PC. Before I had to drag out the right cable for each camera, load up the right software (different for each) for each camera, go through a contortive process of selecting photos and downloading them, and they would never seem to end up in the right directory/folder! Then (too often!) I would get some kind of arcane error where the error message was useless as to what really went wrong. I would then have to re-boot, start over, and hope it worked. The simple card reader made it SO much easier!

 

[iakustov]

After switching to film completely 4 yrs ago, I don't shoot digital at all (except for pics from iphone for selling some stuff etc.) and dont see me going back to digital "full frame" slr. I just cant stand the look of the image from digital camera now (this may seem strange).
Sold the last digital camera I owned (canon G15) a couple of weeks ago which had been unused for several years after my wife bought an iphone.

 

[paul ron]

till a few yearsxago it was 100%.

i just got a digital camera to play with, its fun but not a replacement. i hate computer post work.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am not so big on the computer pre work either.

 

[dpurdy]

I can't afford the high powered computer and digital camera. Also sitting in front of a computer editing images gives me a headache. I have a 5.6 mega pixel Nikon to photograph my prints that are too large for my scanner. When film is gone I will switch to pottery..

 

[Mark R. Bradshaw]

Any film, color or b/w.
Difficult with professional working photographers. Include or exclude. Leave that up to you.

I stuffed up. Treat the first option as "UP TO 100%".

 

[Mark R. Bradshaw]

I have to use digital for work sometimes, but all the stuff I do for myself is on film.

 

[1kgcoffee]

Up to 100%. There are certain things you can do with digital better than you can do with film, bracketing, exposure blending, astrophotography and stitched panos. For now I much prefer the look and process of film