Why you should be shooting film

[George Mann]

I personally don't care if someone shoots film or digital. My main beef is with the film shooters who waste their time and money shooting it, just to digitize it in the end!

 

[Siompa]

I liked his stuff before but getting tired of his crusade against digital. You should sell your idea by talking about the pros, not by talking about the cons of something else.

 

[blockend]

I'm in favour of posting in existing threads for "what camera shall I get?" type questions, because there's a wealth of data already out there. This thread was a response to a YouTube post where everyone had their say, and had run its course 20 months ago. It was 7 pages long and the new poster responded to the original post, in larger text than anyone else, with pejoratives. One might assume a thread would be reanimated by quoting something someone had written along the way. My impression is the new poster hadn't bothered to read the thread, which already contained points for and against. Once relit, someone else was happy to fan the flames, because that's what they do.

The YouTube presenter is a polemicist, he's making a point by exaggeration. He made some valid points but offered them in an adversarial way. His point about the deletion of images being central to digital workflow was well made. Photographers who cared for their craft did not habitually throw their negatives away. If they had, a number of photographic books I've compiled in recent years would not exist because they well made up of images I considered unimportant at the time, but have accrued virtues in the intervening decades. The point about cloud storage is simple naivety. I spoke to someone whose business is digital data storage recently, and he agreed that it is inevitable work contained in "clouds" would be made public, visually degraded or monetised at some point. Storage is not an exercise is philanthropy, and the volume of data contained will not give work special status.

 

[gr82bart]

You should sell your idea by talking about the pros, not by talking about the cons of something else.

+1

 

[jtk]

I'm in favour of posting in existing threads for "what camera shall I get?" type questions, because there's a wealth of data already out there. This thread was a response to a YouTube post where everyone had their say, and had run its course 20 months ago. It was 7 pages long and the new poster responded to the original post, in larger text than anyone else, with pejoratives. One might assume a thread would be reanimated by quoting something someone had written along the way. My impression is the new poster hadn't bothered to read the thread, which already contained points for and against. Once relit, someone else was happy to fan the flames, because that's what they do.

The YouTube presenter is a polemicist, he's making a point by exaggeration. He made some valid points but offered them in an adversarial way. His point about the deletion of images being central to digital workflow was well made. Photographers who cared for their craft did not habitually throw their negatives away. If they had, a number of photographic books I've compiled in recent years would not exist because they well made up of images I considered unimportant at the time, but have accrued virtues in the intervening decades. The point about cloud storage is simple naivety. I spoke to someone whose business is digital data storage recently, and he agreed that it is inevitable work contained in "clouds" would be made public, visually degraded or monetised at some point. Storage is not an exercise is philanthropy, and the volume of data contained will not give work special status.

Your house will be broken into and your prints and negatives will be destroyed in the ensuing fire. By contrast, my archival prints and negatives also exist on hard drives (with digitized printing instructions)... as well as in clouds.

 

[blockend]

Your house will be broken into and your prints and negatives will be destroyed in the ensuing fire. By contrast, my archival prints and negatives also exist on hard drives (with digitized printing instructions)... as well as in clouds.

Don't play with matches. Or the Bold and italics key.

 

[jtk]

I'm in favour of posting in existing threads for "what camera shall I get?" type questions, because there's a wealth of data already out there. This thread was a response to a YouTube post where everyone had their say, and had run its course 20 months ago. It was 7 pages long and the new poster responded to the original post, in larger text than anyone else, with pejoratives. One might assume a thread would be reanimated by quoting something someone had written along the way. My impression is the new poster hadn't bothered to read the thread, which already contained points for and against. Once relit, someone else was happy to fan the flames, because that's what they do.

The YouTube presenter is a polemicist, he's making a point by exaggeration. He made some valid points but offered them in an adversarial way. His point about the deletion of images being central to digital workflow was well made. Photographers who cared for their craft did not habitually throw their negatives away. If they had, a number of photographic books I've compiled in recent years would not exist because they well made up of images I considered unimportant at the time, but have accrued virtues in the intervening decades. The point about cloud storage is simple naivety. I spoke to someone whose business is digital data storage recently, and he agreed that it is inevitable work contained in "clouds" would be made public, visually degraded or monetised at some point. Storage is not an exercise is philanthropy, and the volume of data contained will not give work special status.

Prolix prose should always be ignored.

 

[blockend]

Prolix prose should always be ignored.

Brevity is the enemy of clarity, especially on the internet. Reading the thread before commenting makes an angel smile.

 

[removed account4]

I personally don't care if someone shoots film or digital. My main beef is with the film shooters who waste their time and money shooting it, just to digitize it in the end!

LOL thats a great beef, almost as good as "people that don't use tri x and d76"

 

[wyofilm]

Everyone has their own reasons for shooting film and largely it is personal.

Giles Duley gives his reasons in an Ilford video. His are are inspirational.

 

[jtk]

Everyone has their own reasons for shooting film and largely it is personal.

Giles Duley gives his reasons in an Ilford video. His are are inspirational.

I doubt that many rely on "inspiration", re: film Vs digital. Most, I suspect, make the decision on the basis of convenience (happen to have film camera or digital camera).

Giles Duley's personal story is, of course, inspirational. And he does mention HP5, in his introduction and in a brief joke, just in passing. Somewhere around 33:00 he demonstrates the value of digital photography...has to do with sharing images.

I like HP5 too...liked HP3 and HP4. And I like Ilford Gold Fiber Silk, an inkjet paper that looks as good as Agfa Portriga Rapid did...similar tone.

 

[George Mann]

LOL thats a great beef, almost as good as "people that don't use tri x and d76"

This isn't quite in the same league of comparison, since people have little if anything to gain by doing so.

 

[CMoore]

I personally don't care if someone shoots film or digital. My main beef is with the film shooters who waste their time and money shooting it, just to digitize it in the end!

I am not qualified to say if it is a "Waste" or not. But for me, personally, if i did not have a darkroom, i would not be shooting film.
I would simply get a decent Digital SLR and embrace the new, awesome, technology.
Circa 2017, i am not seeing the advantage of shooting film and then scanning and printing from a computer.......but maybe there is.?
At any rate.....I am very lucky to have an extra bedroom that i could "easily" turn into a darkroom.
I suppose we all find a level, for our own brand of water.

 

[removed account4]

This isn't quite in the same league of comparison, since people have little if anything to gain by doing so.

some suggest using tri x ( you know, the olde tri x not the new stuff after the 80s reformulation ) and d76 are the perfect combination and anything else is a waste of effort,
just like if you aren't using a hasselblad and zeiss biogon lens, or an ebony and scheider triple convertible, or not using the zone syxtem or densitometry or SLIMT printing techniques one is wasting their efforts ...

i'm at a loss why someone has little or anything to gain from using a commercial printer. ( that is who prints my scanned files )

 

[George Mann]

i'm at a loss why someone has little or anything to gain from using a commercial printer. ( that is who prints my scanned files )

Compare the scan to both the images produced by a Canon 1DS MKIII or Leica M60, and the original film exposure using a good loupe and get back with me.

 

[wyofilm]

I doubt that many rely on "inspiration", re: film Vs digital. Most, I suspect, make the decision on the basis of convenience (happen to have film camera or digital camera).

Giles Duley's personal story is, of course, inspirational. And he does mention HP5, in his introduction and in a brief joke, just in passing. Somewhere around 33:00 he demonstrates the value of digital photography...has to do with sharing images.

I like HP5 too...liked HP3 and HP4. And I like Ilford Gold Fiber Silk, an inkjet paper that looks as good as Agfa Portriga Rapid did...similar tone.

I chose the above video because he is a film shooter and has such an important story to tell. Make no mistake, though, he shoots film with plenty of personal, practical, and artistic reasons.

 

[removed account4]

Compare the scan to both the images produced by a Canon 1DS MKIII or Leica M60, and the original film exposure using a good loupe and get back with me.

sorry i don't have either of those cameras, and your argument really makes no sense.

i've louped scans wtih 4x5 fuji chromes and color negatives .. shot with schneider and symetrigon lenses

no issues...

if you're argument had to do with the "fun" they were missing out on, it would be fine,
but sorry, your comments dont' really fit my reality ..

 

[George Mann]

your argument really makes no sense.

Most people wouldn't understand.

your comments dont' really fit my reality ..

You are fortunate.

 

[removed account4]

Most people wouldn't understand.

You are fortunate.

i guess am lucky LOL
thank goodness i don't have a hasselblad / zeiss biogon lens; an ebony and scheider triple convertible;
i don't use the zone syxtem, a light meter or densitometry or SLIMT printing techniques ... and have never used D76

 

[wyofilm]

and have never used D76

Oh, dear. Now THAT is a problem. (I think I used D76 in the early 80's).

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Your house will be broken into and your prints and negatives will be destroyed in the ensuing fire. ...

That's an important point. When there is a house fire and no loss of life, then so often I hear people lamenting the loss of their family photos more than anything.

For over 20 years I've had the majority of my negatives stored in a bank safety deposit box; a large one.

 

[jtk]

I chose the above video because he is a film shooter and has such an important story to tell. Make no mistake, though, he shoots film with plenty of personal, practical, and artistic reasons.

Thanks for this second video. It's also excellent. He loves film, he loves the darkroom (sometimes), but... he also relies on digital.

Paying attention to your FIRST Giles Duley video you'll discover that his priority is relationships, not anything about film or digital.

He does spend extended time demonstrating the value of digital for his purposes (e.g. sending files to subjects who can only view them on iPads and phones).

Clearly, he or his printer when he lacks the time, makes beautiful B&W prints....and he also mentions shooting digital (in his sinful past?). He hasn't always relied on one old Nikon.

I agree with Duley that there's a special satisfaction in film. Nikon scanning and inkjet printing sometimes finds more in my old negatives than I'd realized in darkroom era (using Neofin and Zone System more than most). It's tremendously exciting to scan and print negatives and prints made by my rural Silicon Valley farm family and my urban San Francisco families around 1900. I love B&W photography, and I enjoy film scanning.

 

[removed account4]

Compare the scan to both the images produced by a Canon 1DS MKIII or Leica M60, and the original film exposure using a good loupe and get back with me.

if i compare a scan of lets say a color negative made with a leica
( i have one with a sunshine lens ) made by the pro lab i use
and with the same leica scanned by me and printed by the pro lab i use
the images will look exactly the same. the film processed images are processed
and scanned and tweeked by the lab's computer, and the scans i make my self
are scanned and tweeked by my computer and then retweeted/profiled for her printer.
so it will just be an interpretation of the negative thing. and black and white
i have printed a 4x5 enlargement or 35mm enlargement from film and showed the image
side by side with a scan from the film and printed by my lab, and the flm-person i showed it to
wasn't able to tell them apart... all these nuances that are always claimed by people why one
thing is better than the other dont' really work all the time, especially if someone who knows how to print
and knows how to scan and burn/dodge submit file and print / knows what they are doing , does it ..
sure you give an inexperienced person a computer and a scanner and a mouse and tell them to go to town
the results will be the same as if you gave an inexperienced person a negative and an enlarger and some trays with
chemistry in them and say go go town ...
what matters the most is whoever is using whatever kind of camera they are using doesn't listen to all the noise
regarding what a tragic mistake they are making for not doing everything so and so is telling them to do ..
whether that is having their files printed at a lab cause they like tangible, having books made, cause they like book-format
having darkroom prints made by them cause they like hands on darkroom work ...
unfortunately everyone has a drum and a chest to pound and a soapbox to yelp on and people sometimes don't know any better
thank to listen to the noise

 

[BradS]

I lost interest less than minute into it at about the seventh time he said "shooting film".

Just another hipster doing what hipsters do.

 

[faberryman]

Shooting film is great if you want to shoot film.