Why do you choose to use film?

[timlayton]

Hi everyone, I am curious as to why you choose to use film in your photography? I personally use film 100% of the time in my black and white fine art work and the majority of the time for my color work (landscapes, architecture, nature, etc.) I always learn something from everyone here so I appreciate you sharing your reasons why you use film.

To get things started here are a few of my reasons:
1.) I prefer the exposure latitude and dynamic range of film.
2.) I personally like the "look" of film images.
3.) I like having the option of a parallel workflow (analog and digital).
4.) I like the analog backup of film.
5.) When the right subject matter is printed in black and white from a true b/w negative, I can't think of anything better.

How about you?

Tim

 

[Christopher Walrath]

For me it is all I have ever used and it would take a lot of time to gain any sort of technical facility with d*****l and that would be creativity wasted IMHO. Kind of like learning to golf left handed after getting to a good game playing for twenty years right handed. Sure you could do it. But why change what's workin'?

And welcome to APUG.

 

[tkamiya]

All of my logical reasons are same as yours. But....

Being a software engineer (programmer) in real-life, doing digital work is so much like work. A time alone in darkroom is my idea of doing something "fun".

Incidentally, I like the look of color work in digital but like the look of film in B&W work. The other way around doesn't work for me. I don't know why - but this is the way I like both.

 

[removed account4]

i don't have any particular reason for using film other than it's fun.
i have and use the other thing from time to time, it is also fun,
and i really have no reason not to use either of them ...

 

[michaelbsc]

Familiarity. I started with film in the 1960s. And I still like it.

It's my hobby, so I do what I like.

 

[bdial]

I choose film because;
1) The hands-on nature of film is more interesting and fits my thought processes better.
2) The processes involved are different from my work life which is spent in front of computers.
3) I'd rather not scrap all the film gear I have for digi gear that's obsolete before you get it out of the box.
4) The time and money investment that would be required for digi is more than I'm willing to spend.

 

[2F/2F]

It's technically superior in a large number of shooting situations. I know how to use it. I like using it. I already have everything I need to use it. I prefer the way it looks for almost everything. In my head, there is a non-tangible conceptual difference between using something that has been sampled and using something that is infinite and that physically exists in your hand. I dislike working on pictures on a computer. I don't have a good computer, scanner, camera, printer, or any other digital equipment, and investing in it all would be incredibly expensive. I am not going to spend shit tons of money to have less fun making a largely technically inferior and product using a medium that I do not find conceptually interesting for my own work.

Digital is an outstanding tool for snapshots, low light and/or commercial work, but I have close to zero need or want for it in my own "art" pictures.

My favorite online article on why we love film: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/why-we-love-film.htm.

 

[Vaughn]

Besides the usual smart-alec remark that I can't find a place to put a memory card into my 8x10, I like the results of contacting in-camera negatives using the carbon printing process. I prefer my prints to be as sharp as the negatives.

That said, I also make platinum prints on watercolor paper and will accept a little loss of sharpness inherent with that process.

 

[Wayne]

Because i can touch it.

 

[IloveTLRs]

In a nutshell, because It Doesn't Suck.

- B&W film is truly unique and cannot be 100% faithfully emulated
- I don't need to worry about upgrading my gear all the time
- It's cheap

 

[Cromlech]

My reasons are simple:

I would not feel like a good or "true" photographer if I did not use film. I am not abandoning hundreds of years of history for convenience.

Richard

 

[Dave in Kansas]

My reasons mostly parallel what others have said.

I love film. I enjoy working in the darkroom. It is more of a hands on creative process.
After looking at a computer monitor all day at the office, that is the last thing I want to do when I get home.
And perhaps one of the most important reasons is the archival qualities of film. My slides and negatives can sit in a box for probably a century or more and still be viewable without ever needing to back them up.

Film is fun.

David

 

[wildbill]

Is there an alternative? What else would i keep in my freezer?

 

[HowardDvorin]

Photographing with film is what I do. I have been ussing filom now for almost 60 years and I like it.

Howard

 

[softshock]

I enjoy using film because it is tangible, and in my opinion, much funner than digital. I love how streamlined the process can be. Plus, with digital, you're always using the same sensor unless you change cameras (or digital backs). If you don't like the way a certain setting looks on that sensor, it won't be any better six months down the road; also, even the Leica M9 only goes to ISO1600. With a film camera, you can use a different film to get a color scene or a greyscale scene. You could change the film to get ISO25 or ISO25000.
Another great advantage with film, as surprising as it may seem, is that it won't be outdated with technological advances the way digital cameras are. Film could always be scanned to a high resolution to be used digitally.

 

[mwdake]

Being a software engineer (programmer) in real-life, doing digital work is so much like work. A time alone in darkroom is my idea of doing something "fun".

That's me too.
I spend too much time on the computer and like the relaxation of the darkroom.
For me it not about the photo but the process.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Because, at its most fundamental, it's not simply a rendered abstraction. It's a real thing.

Ken

 

[dangeresque]

It's tangible and genuine.

 

[jglass]

It's beautiful.... and you don't need to a computer to do it.

 

[Marcus S]

I use film exclusively for assignments. Why digital, when I can shoot with a Rolleiflex and film?

 

[MattKing]

Why would I change?

I've liked the materials, the processes and the results for more than 40 years.

 

[Naples]

Because an actual image is captured on a light sensitive surface.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Because all legendary cameras , lenses and processes are for analog and there are 150 years of experience , science , aesthetics behind them. I dont talk about chemistry. May be Egyptians and Greeks are worked on electricity but electronics are new. And I hate the colors , sharpness , bw images of digital and If I live 150 years ,after I start to invest to digital.
And I dont like modern aesthetics , like video jokeys , disco music and I love old culture and its products.

 

[nworth]

Probably the biggest reason is habit. I'm used to film. On the more substantial side, I like having a physical image to keep and work with. It seems more reliable and permanent. For black and white, I also think the film images are better, mostly because of the dynamic range. I use digital a lot, especially for color and especially where the convenience is a factor. But I prefer film when it is at all appropriate, both for color and black and white. I also still prefer silver-gelatin prints over ink jet black and white.

 

[munz6869]

I enjoy the d.i.y, mad scientist aspect of fooling about in the darkroom. I like forgetting what's on the undeveloped film from my holidays and then being surprised all over again. I like putting all my negatives in green folders, lined up on a shelf with typed labels, like Hansard (parliamentary records). I like grain that isn't awful, and I like having to think...

Marc!