Do You Shoot with Film?
Do you still shoot with film or have you transitioned fully to digital?
Time for a reader poll:
Feel free to tell us about your response in comments below.
Subscription Options
Join 352087 Subscribers
Do you still shoot with film or have you transitioned fully to digital?
Time for a reader poll:
Feel free to tell us about your response in comments below.
Each day we send out a quick email to thousands of DPS readers to notify them of updates. This email is just short excerpt of the first few lines of our latest post with a link if you want to read it all. You can unsubscribe from this this service at any time.
This service is provided by a third party (Feedburner) and you can subscribe to it by leaving your email address in the following field and confirming your subscription when you get an email asking you to do so.
Enter your email address for
Daily Updates:
For those wanting a weekly summary of what happens on this site this free email newsletter is probably your best option. It includes a summary of the tips posted to the site each week. This newsletter is subscribed to by over 25000 readers (many who also subscribe to the other options above) - come join the community!
To subscribe to this weekly newsletter simply add your email address to the following field and then follow the confirmation prompts. You will be able to unsubscribe at any time.
Enter your email address for
Free Weekly Newsletter:
110 Responses to “Do You Shoot with Film?” - Add Yours
April 12th, 2009 at 8:25 am
Not surprising that the lead (at this moment) is — “no, and I don’t own a film camera”. However I suspect that I may be speaking for a bunch of we filmless individuals when I say that I’d like to own and use a film camera — however, because I have a perfectly good digital camera right now (and don’t have a lot of cash), I’m going to stick with what I have. I grew up with a cheap fixed focus film camera, and that has made me wish to learn more about a more serious film camera — but not for now!
Cliffs and Ruins, photography from Michigan’s Keweenaw Peninsula.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Film only.
Thats right. I’m that guy.
Still, after all these years, I still don’t feel the desire to switch.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:40 am
I converted to digital a few years ago. Sadly, film is becoming outdated, labs are closing down, and the film itself is expensive. Digital is the way to go for me.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:42 am
There should be an option for having started with digital but is now starting to shoot film as well, because that’s me.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:01 am
I *love* b/w MF film. my 35mm stuff has been totally replaced with digital, but there is just something magic about 6×6 b/w film. I shoot it almost every day.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:07 am
I’m with CK as well. I’m taking a historical and experimental photography course this semester, and have grown very fond of film! So far, we’ve done some pretty interesting things with Lith film, RC paper, Pinhole cameras, cyanotypes, and I’m working on getting decent shots with my newly bought (and very much loved) Holga.
If you ever feel like you’re getting too serious with your photography, try a Holga. You can control next to nothing, and it’s very liberating.
I’d like to keep up with film, but I’m afraid this hobby is going to be very expensive, and only more so in the future.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:30 am
there is nothing digital that touches the real quality of film. for instance ansel adams was an ok photographer but it is his negs & prints that are so rich. a 35 mm neg is equal to 24 megapixils. tiny sensors in digital cameras suck. get a full frame sensor camera and it will cost ya but be worth it if quality is your goal. i shoot digital for the bs stuff but for my art shots i shoot digital so i can view the scene and then i shoot it with my film camera. get the neg processed and a digital copy made. then have real prints made (prints using wet developing process like a photo lab would do) from the digital copy image. i use the digital copy image cause i can upload it to a labs site without having to take my neg there. also it ensures that the neg does not get lost or scratched. the neg goes into a fire proof safe and is only used to make another digital copy when the first one wears out. yes the wear out….digital files degrade because all burned cd’s and dvd’s go bad over time…..sometimes just a few years.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:39 am
I miss film. I still have my two 35 mm SLRs, but I don’t have the money for it – especially for B/W, which would be the type of film I’d be shooting if I were able to afford the money and the time. I love my Canon 40D, which is my transition camera as of 1.5 years ago, but I still think film captures the light differently… sigh!
April 12th, 2009 at 9:59 am
I haven’t shot with film since I replaced my little compact point-and-shoot with our first digital compact almost ten years ago. There’s nowhere around us to get film developed anyway, but I *like* being able to cull the failed shots before getting the batch printed, and not having to worry that ten of the 36 shots on the film are duds.
Embarrassingly enough, I *still* have a 35mm B&W film roll sitting undeveloped in my studio…
April 12th, 2009 at 10:12 am
I do not miss spending $4-6 roll + $12+ for good developing, to get 3-4 keepers (which would have to be rescanned anyway to be used digitally).
That being said, I have recently shot some slide film (even more expensive) thru my Nikon N80 to take full advantage of my superwide FX lenses. I can’t yet afford a full frame digital, but it is truly amazing to see how wide my 14-24 goes when not subjected to the DX crop.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:19 am
A few years ago I only shot digital, then started shooting film 6X4.5 then moved to 4X5 large format film. Now I use the digital as a Polaroid or point and shoot.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:49 am
I have a Mamiya RB67. 6cm by 7cm negatives are just awesome. And once scanned they are the equivalent of a 100+megapixel camera. Insane! I am still waiting to get ‘the shot’ to enlarge it as big as a billboard…
Love it!
April 12th, 2009 at 11:03 am
I am a fan of kodak ektrachrome vc 4×5 sheet film…. digital is for weddings, snapshots, quick turnaround and preliminary ’sketches’
April 12th, 2009 at 11:58 am
When someone develops a digital camera that gives me the same ‘connection’ to my subject that my Olympus OM and Hasselblad cameras do, I’ll probably think about making the switch to digital. In the mean time, I am absolutely loving my Hasselblad and those big beautiful 6×6 negatives, even developed clumsily myself.
Whether it is simply being forced to think about the shot more or something else, my percentage of ‘keepers’ is dramatically higher using my film cameras.
April 12th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
I recently put a roll of film though my Rolleicord as an experiment to see how the camera performed. I am pleased with the results so will probably continue to run a roll of film though the old girl out every once in a while. In addition, whenever I am out with the camera people stop and mention something along the lines of “wow, what a cool camera”.
April 12th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
I could not vote, because there is no option for (digital use based on) percentages.
This poll says nothing about real use, IMHO.
Interesting reactions, though. (And I am a BIG fan, really.)
I don’t use many rolls, but film is still 90% of the way I make money through a lens.
Digital is perfect for me when taking portrait pictures under natural light, no contest.
If the 5D would not have “moiré” I would use it more often professionally.
For now I still prefer film, also because my film cameras have a much shorter sync time.
Unfortunately, I can not afford a Hasselblad ;-)
Everybody hails digital today, but for the price of a half decent scan I don’t even bother to argue, and have the best of both worlds!
Digital is just about 99% of all the pictures I shoot these days, so go figure.
There is a camera in my phone, and the compact Leica is very nice for snaps and scraps.
April 12th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
I only shoot digital right now because of expense, but I still own several film SLRs. One of these days I might start using one again. I miss the lenses more than anything else.
April 12th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
I like digital for the fact that I can see the photo right away.
April 12th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
I still shoot film or try to at least once a month because I feel it keeps your ability to compose a shot when you see it at its best ; not later in some photo fix software. I feel as you compose the shot the artist that is the photographer has a chance to be the the one making the shot more than just a photo.
April 12th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I’m about 20 and would expect a lot of people my age and younger who are getting into photography (by themselves, rather than being taught by someone) would go straight to digital. I can see how my picture will look (approximately) before I even take it. Compare that to learning when you have to wait till you finish a roll and develop it.
But like me, I’m sure a lot of the people who grow up with digital will delve into that historic medium that came before. I’d love to learn film one day. But not till I’ve got a hang of photography a bit better.
April 12th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
Every time I shoot film I’m reminded of why I don’t shoot film.
April 12th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
I have some nostalgia for film. I loved darkroom work but became t0o sensitized to the chemicals and got massive headaches in my darkroom. Photoshop was a revelation for me. I could do my work development without getting sick. Of course my first digital camera was 2 MP and cost me $600. Sure my big prints looked lousy but at least I could still do my photography development.
Even now, with a new 15 MP DSLR I still can’t get the quality I got with my old Maimya medium format but when I consider what I used to spend on film, chemicals and developing for my color images, I really don’t miss that part. And the quality of digital cameras has come so far in so short a time. I’m satisfied with my digital camera for good sized prints.
I’ve also found that now that I’m not trying so hard to make every shot count, my photography has improved more quickly in the last 10 years than it did in the previous 25. I doesn’t cost the equivalent of a tank of gas to shoot a 100 shots. I’m sure there’s some cost from wear and tear on my equipment and I have to amortize the expense of Lightroom and Photoshop, but honestly I paid for both – at full retail – in less than 6 month if you consider what I’ve saved in film and developing. I pay about the same for printing my frameable shots. However, those are such a small percentage of the total.
If you’re not shooting on assignment for top end print magazines or advertisers to pay for your film and developing, medium format film is more and more the playground of the rich. And as the big film makers withdraw from the market and competition diminishes for film, it will fall to specialty companies with specialty prices. The writing is on the wall. Film is going the way of the vinyl LP and tube amplifiers. It will still have its hold outs and fans (for good reason) but will become a very niche market.
April 12th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
I’ve never seriously shot with film, but I really want to learn. I also want to learn how to use the darkroom. Hopefully someday I’ll be able to more fully immerse myself (and my funds) into it…
April 12th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
This is disturbingly sad.
I learned photography through film. It’s the only true way to learn.
Film is millions of times better than digital.
And that’s coming from a teenager.
April 12th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
What would you say that film offers to the beginner that digital doesn’t Tom?
April 12th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
@Tom. So how is learning to shoot with film the only true way to learn? What does film have to do with composition and lighting? Nothing. I’m really sick of all the film people thinking that in order to be a good photographer you must suffer for some reason with film. How does this make it more authentic? I’m 40years old and I was more than happy to give up film as soon as the Digital revolution started. Film does have it’s place but it is not a true test of a real photographer.
April 12th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Film is digital now, just ask any lab you use. They first process your film then have to scan it in to create a digital file that they can print from on their modern equipment. So the question should be… “Do you download or process and scan?”
Honestly I prefer to download so I can make backups immediately, processing leaves your product open to the chance of a lab tech’s mistake and scanning may or may not give you a file of the same quality of a true digital camera.
It’s time for this argument to be over, film is dead. move on.
April 12th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Still use a Cannnet QL17 on most projects, and an aging Elan.
April 12th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
When i took my first photography course it was strictly film. i felt it was a good way to learn, i was forced to learn about exposure right off the bat; i learned the relation of aperture and shutter speed, fstops etc. We were to shoot in full manual so that we could understand how everything works. also, since there were a set amount of exposures per roll i was kind of forced to think about composition and shoot more carefully instead of just snapping away.
but answering adam’s question film doesn’t offer more to the beginner than digital. but i think people that learn with film first understand exposure better. the way i see it is that shooting digital is just like having a darkroom right in your camera.
as much as i love having instant feedback i love shooting film. if film was cheaper i think i would be shooting film more often. plus i just love the way pictures from film look.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
I shoot digital only when I’m getting paid but I shoot film for pleasure, there is no greater thrill to me than watching that perfect print form in the developer.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
mostly use film for long exposure shots and even after that i only develop the negatives & digitize them. I’m probably better off using film as im a bit trigger happy with digital though digital gives soooo much flexibility
April 12th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Well, as for shooting film. I discovered joy in digital shoooting 2 years ago, when I got myself my frist DSLR. And from somewhere in teh middle of last year (1 year in using digital), I got the wish to get me a film SLR. I got 1978 Nikon FE, I already had some great lens for it… It was a cheap thing to purchase and the post processing is not that expensive as well. The only drawback for this specific film camera is lack of autofocus. But I don’t mind focusing through rangefinder, actually it gives me the pleasure of almost full manual shooting. And that is a jox for itself. Especially when I got my second roll of film finished (first roll was 10 years old Fuji and everything looked like it was shot through a bvery warm filter). and photos were just amazing). It is really fun to have to adjust aperture and focus manually. I think it helped me gain additional feel for digital as well. And the usage of Nikon FE got me into buying FX DSLR (D700 which should arrive this week).
Just informative: Nikon FE (1978) cost me 55 €, Nikon 50 mm f1.8 AI (1984) cost me another 45 €, every roll of film costs around 3-5 € and developing photos in a studio around 12 €. Not too costly (if I don’t consider my D700 kit for 3800€, that is).
April 12th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
I own over 100 film cameras and have a fully equipped darkroom, but this summer will be my 3 year anniversary since I’ve used any of it. When I first hung 20″x30″ prints from my 5D next to 20″x prints from medium format Tmax 100 I put my Hasselblad 500c/m and Pentax 67II on Ebay, and shut down my darkroom.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
About 5 years ago it was becoming hard and very expensive buying and getting processing for 120 and 220 rolls. I have a Rollie, Omega 120, 4X5 Speed Graphic, and 2 film Nikons
April 12th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Not surprising results considering that this site is the “Digital Photography School.” I suspect you’d get different results from a more general photography audience. Still would lean heavily towards digital, but not so dramatically.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
I use only digital. i switched over 5 years ago after getting a 4meg pixel point and shoot as a gift and working up to 12 meg DLSR now. Previously used film for about 20 years.
i prefer digital for the simple fact it meets my needs, even before this, film met my needs and i was always trying to experiment ( i couldn’t afford a SLR then nor the film cost). Unless you are very specialised or an artist. you are not going to be able to get as much out of film as you can out of digital in the sense that it is more versatile and has open up a segment of the population to get into photography – witness sites such as DPS and flickr. Several members of my family were into SLR way before myself (heck we made cameras for the best part of the 20th century) and they were still glad to move up to digital.
As one person has commented 35 mm is the equivalent of 24 mega pixels. If that is the case, then I look forward to getting a DSLR that has that level of resolution, but the quality of the photo will still be down to the photographers’ skill. Digital makes it easier.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
I think personally I would like to try and shoot film at some point but currently feel the benefit of tossing all those photos you dont really want to print is a great plus.
April 12th, 2009 at 11:09 pm
I still have my Nikon N90s, and love it!
I just can’t part with it, even though my D80 gets most of
my attention.
I did take it out for a small shoot awhile back.
Tom
April 12th, 2009 at 11:32 pm
I teach adult ed photo classes here in Los Angeles and we offer Photo 101 a b&w film class every term. And amazing to find so many people that are still interested in learning the film/print process. Some students enjoy the mix of digital and film classes & a few are devoted to showing film only. .
April 12th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
I really only started doing mainly digital a few years ago. I grew up on film and took classes with film. Sometimes I still miss the magic of the darkroom. Recently I dusted off my film cameras and loaded them up and have been enjoying it sporadically. It was kind of a fun to shoot and not know exactly what had happened until I went to the lab.
Digital is more cost effective and convenient, but honestly I still prefer how the film looks. Perhaps because I don’t yet have a dSLR, just a fancy prosumer camera. But when I was shopping recently for a dSLR, I told the sales rep for the film camera I own how much I love the look of that camera’s photos, and asked which digital model would give me similar results. He told me that there still was really no comparison between how my film camera sees things and how any digital camera sees things.
April 12th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
P.S. I must also admit I really love how film smells. :P
April 13th, 2009 at 12:07 am
I started last year with a point and shoot Nikon and recently moved to a D40. I love shooting digital, it’s the cat’s pajamas.
That said, there is something so very wonderful about film and I wanted to get in on it. I bought a Holga and I’m hooked. I send the film out (http://www.northcoastphoto.com/) and find their prices reasonable and their service quite good.
Love him or hate him, Ken Rockwell has a great post on film: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/why-we-love-film.htm
April 13th, 2009 at 12:35 am
Remember, film brought us to digital in a sense. Think of all of the components of photography, whether you use film of digital. I’m fairy young, and only had a film camera when I was a child. I grew up on several digital point-and-shoots, and now I finally own my very on Nikon D90 DSLR. It’s simply amazing taking pictures in digital. “Your shot is ready, sir” – immediately. Peek at that colorful LCD screen, and you can judge how good, or bad, of a job you did. I can’t wait to see what the future holds…
April 13th, 2009 at 1:08 am
I quite often shoot with film, though never for money, only for myself and mostly in BW. It gives me pleasure even to see through the brighter and better viewfinder made 20 years before than the one in my current camera. Besides, the film gives me a feeling of something alive in the frame, somwthing I can almost touch, while digital is more detailed and sharp.
April 13th, 2009 at 1:24 am
I have an old Rebel XS film camera that I cut my teeth on, but I like to shoot ‘non-standard’ photographs, and modern film developers have NO clue as to how to develop film if their computer can’t figure it out. I can’t tell you how many shoots I’ve lost because they couldn’t figure out how to develop it – even after I emphatically advised them of the nature of the shots, and that they’d have to do it ‘manually’.
When I finally had enough money to upgrade, I switched to digital, and never looked back. I now shoot 100X more pictures, and I control how they come out. And, when you’re as bad a photographer as I am, film is a fool’s gambit. Thank goodness for Photoshop and RAW format!
April 13th, 2009 at 1:32 am
I own several film cameras, 35mm, medium and large format, but only shoot film about once per month. Sometimes I get enamored of film, especially b/w, and shoot more often, but that’s about it. The expense is getting to the point where it’s really not worth it anymore. I do love it, however.
April 13th, 2009 at 2:17 am
I’d love to switch, but i have an old Nikon Fm and Fm2 kicking around, a surplus of film that i found on the cheap and I managed to turn my room into a dark room with a load of kit I got for free. Which all means i can take pics cheaper with film than spashing out however many hundred quid for a sexy SLR.
Novelty wares off though, its damn hard work to print everything by hand and takes a lot of time and practice to do it well.
April 13th, 2009 at 2:41 am
I still have 5 film cameras (all manual) with lenses and have never used them for maybe about 4 years or so since I had my 1st DSLR (canon 20D). I have added 2 more DSLRs (350D & 40D), yet still I don’t want to get rid of my film cameras.
April 13th, 2009 at 3:24 am
I am one of those that spent big bucks (600) on an early digital about 12 years or more ago. Although the quality wasn’t good enough for large prints the smaller ones were fine. I have always had at least one or two film cameras but the cost kept me from being able to take all the pictures I wanted. Now ten cameras later and working with my first dslr I realize that digital is what made me become obsessed with photography. Now, learning what I have learned in this journey, I will probably, at some point, start shooting with film again. Right now I’m enjoying the digital ride.
April 13th, 2009 at 3:49 am
I’m working on a project that will cost me roughly $15000 when completed (Mamiya RZ). I could avoid that huge cost by shooting 35mm digital, but it just wouldn’t be the same. I’d never shoot 35mm film again, however, nothing comes close to the look you get with a medium or large format film. It’s magical. Aren’t we after all trying to get the film look with different plugins???
April 13th, 2009 at 3:59 am
I got my first camera, a Kodak Brownie Hawkeye, when I was 7. By the time I was 18, I had used my summer job money to purchase a Nikon SLR. I had my own darkroom with an Omega enlarger and great Zeiss lenses for it.
I purchased an Olympus P&S while I was using my Nikon F5, to begin to get the feel for digital photography at the camera level. As it turns out, that was a waste, considering the photos and the camera’s capability didn’t come close to the F5, but the process with the Olympus was interesting.
Some time later I purchased a Nikon D70. That changed everything. I found that for most applications the D70 was pretty close to the F5. Once I moved up to the D200, my switch to digital only occurred, and while I still have that trusty F5, it’s been gathering dust. I’ve sold my darkroom equipment, but I still have the omega and everything which goes with it, including the color head (I did both color and B&W in my darkroom). I can’t seem part with them yet.
There is no doubt that there are still specific purposes for which the F5 might be better, but the capability of the D200 and my software including Photoshop CS4 extended, more than make up for that. I’ll be moving up to a Nikon with a full size sensor soon.
The difference in overall costs of getting the photographs I want with digital equipment, the versatility of the equipment, and the overall workflow have convinced me to be totally digital. Moreover, I believe within a short time of just a few years, digital photographs taken with high quality professional level cameras will be the equal of, or exceed film based photography.
When I was in the Galapagos a couple of years ago, I took more than 5,000 photographs. I culled the photos quickly to about 600, and then culled them to fewer again. I can’t imagine how much more those photos would have cost if they would have been taken on film.
April 13th, 2009 at 4:25 am
Both. I shoot film and digital.
I have a digital camera, and my dad has a dslr which I use sometimes, but the photography class I’m going to start taking at school uses only film, I love both and think that one will benefit the other and vice a verca. Why is both regually no on the list? I didn’t vote.
April 13th, 2009 at 4:44 am
I dont have enough money to purchase a dslr yet, and my dad left me his SLR with several lenses and I must say that there is nothing like taking your own photos, developing them in the dark room yourself, there is something magical about it, b+w photos just dont look the same digitally.
I don’t know about others, but because I can only take a limited number of photos on film, it makes me think about each shot to make sure that they are constructually perfect, even more so than the disposable nature of digital cameras. Not saying that the sheer amount of photos you can take digitally is bad, just personally it has helped me improve as a photographer.
April 13th, 2009 at 5:15 am
The last few rolls I took into be developed came back with spots from spilled developer on the film and a blank roll. I gave up on film because no one seems competent to develop it anymore. Plus the expense…
April 13th, 2009 at 5:44 am
Currently I am teaching an alternative photography class for the first time in two years. I am finding a resurgence of interest in film and old techniques. Needless to say, I am thrilled. My goal is to marry digital media and photography into new fine art media. I urge all photographers that have only used digital cameras to take a class with film. You will be a better photographer. Because as we all know, real photographers do it in the dark…:)
April 13th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
I inherited a film SLR from my dad, which is in perfect condition and i still use it along with my D70
Its an amazing experience shooting film. I take my film SLR out Occassionally and shoot a 35mm roll or two. Its still not difficult to find film and get it developed, but its difficult to find a good processing lab. But the situation is better than UK or US :)
April 13th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
I am planning to buy my analogue SLR camera and make my own darkroom. Do you have any recommendations as for the camera? I’d do mostly black and white photography. I am moving towards Nikon, but any recommendations would be great :)
April 13th, 2009 at 11:49 pm
I don’t like film because:
1) it’s not instant – so it’s hard to learn from your shots when you are looking at them days or weeks later
2) it’s expensive – so you take less pictures – always a bad thing when you’re trying to improve
3) it’s work to share – you have to scan them instead of already being available
4) there’s no exif data so you can’t share how you took that shot with others
I just love being able to tweak my settings on the fly. I try something and if the shot didn’t come out right, I can tweak and try again. Sure, a master photographer knows what settings he should pick from the start, but I sure don’t.
April 14th, 2009 at 12:12 am
I have been an avid slide film shooter for many years. Just bought Canon 50D for Xmas and still trying to get used to it. I love shooting nature with slide film. Digital doesn’t come close – at least that’s how I see it. Yes, it does cost to get the film developed and unfortunately since we only have one location that is processing film I have to drive a 1/2 hour to get there and pick it up. I still have lots of film in the freezer!!
April 14th, 2009 at 12:24 am
I used film all the time until about 7 years ago. Digital is cheaper, more flexible and for me more creative because of the ability to take so many shots and not worry about cost of developing etc. I appreciate the use of film and learned alot using it in my earlier days but I like my art & my work more now with digital media.
April 14th, 2009 at 12:51 am
Gábor said:
Any of the big names made good cameras. Look into backwards compatibility of lenses. I think Nikon is good that way. I know that Pentax is. Or just check yard sales and pick up something real cheap.
April 14th, 2009 at 1:30 am
I not only shoot with film but develop it myself. It’s part of being in a film photography class….I love it though! It’s amazing.
April 14th, 2009 at 7:21 am
After almost completely switching over to digital over a few years, I began to get the itch to start shooting film again. Mostly black and white infrared but also regular black and white and high quality color film. I have been shooting over 45 years and it just stays in your blood! Oh the days when you had wet 8X10 failures on the floor at your feet in the darkroom. Now, digital has come a long way but the true ART of photography lies in the era of film, and it still has a final print that is pure and real.
April 14th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Yes, I shoot a few times a year or more with film. I have a Nikon N65 and a Mamiya RB67 I love dearly. I have a darkroom in my basement and I’ll always love it as much as I love digital photography.
April 15th, 2009 at 5:25 am
nothing can beat the unpredictably awesome effects of film + toy cameras. i use my holga almost everyday and though it might cost more, i find the results far more rewarding than re-touching up the results in photoshop. you can still easily buy good professional film such as ilford, velvia and portra and i haven’t noticed any good labs shutting down around here.
don’t get me wrong, i love the practicability of digital photography :)
April 15th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
I mainly use my DSLR and a digital Point-and-shoot but I have a film camera with underwater housing that I use when diving.
April 16th, 2009 at 11:52 pm
Film has become the way for me to go. Even the cost argument is not applicable! The only expensive kit I bought was my Nikon film scanner, you can get manual focus film equipment dirt cheap nowadays.
Film is also really cheap. I buy expired film in bulk for around 1€ each, and either develop BW myself or color at the drugstore for also only 1€ per film.
Film is exciting way to slow down, stop being a control freak (aka. “it’s grain. it’s supposed to be there!”) and let the magical chemical processes do their stuff with your exposures.
April 17th, 2009 at 1:24 am
I have always been partial to film although I still shoot some digital. However my D70 is dying a slow death, now the internal debate ensues, should my next camera purchase be a film camera or digital.
I have two primary reasons I lean towards film, one is I’m not a tinkerer with my photos, I usually get about 50% good shots out of a roll and those images usually look exactly the way I want them too (the dynamic range cannot be touched). Secondly when I develop the roll, the images (good or bad) are all printed at that point. With digital I rarely print a photo no matter how good it is, it ends up staying in a purely pixelated world. Having a roll of film printed is kind of like Christmas for me, in that I know what I was hoping for, but it’s always a suprise to see what I got.
Now as long as I can keep getting that super wonderful Kodak 400UC I will be a happy camper.
April 17th, 2009 at 1:29 am
Chemical photography is so 19th century… Plus I used to break my glass plates all the time.
Oh, film, right.
No, I’ll still stick to digital thank you. Always hated film when I was stuck with it. Analog. Pah.
April 17th, 2009 at 1:36 am
I have a Canon A1 and two EOS 650’s. My first digital was a Sony 707 and I recently purchased a Canon D40. Have not used my film camera two or three times since I went digital. Cost and ability to shoot high number of frames is the biggest reasons I don’t used the film cameras.
April 17th, 2009 at 1:37 am
I am taking a photography class, and we are using only black and white film. I have had so much fun with the darkroom and the shoots that I purchased a Yashica 124 m camera and have been shooting a project with the 120 film, it’s been a gratifying experience and without benefit of the class I would not have even known about the possibilites that film offers. Still love my digital cameras and use them almost everyday!
April 17th, 2009 at 1:45 am
I’m another film-only shooter (other than my cheap little point and shoot at times). Although it’s becoming outdated, for the time being film is still a requirement for an Associates in Photography. I think it really teaches you to think about your composition and lighting more, mainly because you can’t afford to make mistakes like you can in digital. I’m looking forward to switching to digital in a couple semesters, though – just because the expense of the paper and film is more than I can handle!
April 17th, 2009 at 1:51 am
I still love film. I buy up all the Kodak Ektachrome I can and shoot it all up with my Canon Ae-1, take it to the lab, (Xpro) and fall in love over and over again. This cannot happen with digital. While digital is convenient, it is rather boring and predictable as far as the whole process goes. I hope that film never dies. Also, if you have never owned a film camera, how can you understand what a digital camera is trying to emulate? Understanding light and silver is such an important photographic process. I guess in a world where everything is instant and gratifying it would be hard to actually take the time and sit down to figure out what your camera is actually doing or trying to do… Long live film!!
April 17th, 2009 at 2:03 am
I still shoot 6 x 6 B/W, nothing compares to quality and tonal range digitally. I use digital most of the time, but nothing will ever be able to completely replace my Rolleiflex TLR with B/W film…I also like the smiles and comments that I get when I pull that beautiful piece of art out of its fine polished leather case to take pictures.
April 17th, 2009 at 2:09 am
I “grew up” on film and did my own B&W developing and printing for a long time before reluctantly going digital. My relationship with digital is a love/hate thing and probably always will be. I miss many of the qualities of film photography. To make matters worse I recently sold most of my film equipment and realize now it was a big mistake. If anyone else is contemplating selling their film gear, my advice is, don’t do it!
April 17th, 2009 at 2:11 am
I shot film for 20 years before switching to digital. I love my Nikon D300 and wouldn’t go back. I believe that if you know your camera, have a good eye for composition and understand the “digital darkroom”, you’ll achieve beautiful results.
April 17th, 2009 at 2:45 am
Old time film shooter, Nikon FE / Canon EOS.
Did darkroom also loved black and white and street shooting. (
Along came Digital, color took over.
Stored film equipment, two bodies, lens. awalys at the mercy of what the developer saw if you went affordable. just a hobby but often used professional house but very expensive for prints went to extachrome slides .
Moved on to Sony, Cybers, then Rebels XTI then 30 D Canon.
Have images professionally printed.
Adobe 5 through 7 user not into CS.
Did the pirnters adventure, HP EPSON AND CANON but feel the ink will sink you.
Rather use commerical, more economical in long run.
Taking workshop in NM this September with Carl Varjabedian.
A wonderful time just capturing images and now painting to boot!
April 17th, 2009 at 3:11 am
I learned photography the old fashion way with film cameras & dark rooms. My biggest beef with it has always been the utilization of toxic chemicals to develop film & prints (not just for me but also for the environment). Still there’s nothing more magical than watching a black & white print come to life due to chemistry! You just don’t get that same rush from digital prints. While there is a trade off with digital, I enjoy it more than film. No noxious fumes, no more burning eyes or sinuses! I am still in the process of learning all the tricks of digital editing & feel I have a long long way to go in that department. But it’s definitely worth it!
April 17th, 2009 at 3:24 am
My biggest beef with it has always been the utilization of toxic chemicals to develop film & prints (not just for me but also for the environment).
Look into the Silvergrain line of chemicals. They’re formulated to be as non-toxic as possible for both humans and the environment. I have some fixer on the way right now that I can’t wait to try. Supposedly it doesn’t smell as harsh as traditional fixer.
That said, I’ve also read many times that typical household cleaners and laundry detergents are worse for the environment then most traditional film chemicals. Unless of course you are replicating old 19th century processes that used mercury vapor. ;)
April 17th, 2009 at 6:42 am
I got into photography back in 1989. Mostly used manual focus Minolta cameras with color slide film (Fuji Velvia, Sensia, etc.) and B&W negative (Kodak Tri-X or Plus-X). Got rid of the Minoltas and bought a Nikon Coolpix digital camera about 5 years ago, and replaced it with a Nikon D70 after a couple years.
The way I see it I’ve grown a lot as a photographer since switching to digital, since you see results immediately and you are able to try out a lot of different things without it costing you. I feel more confident now while shooting events that would have frightened me to death in the past, like weddings. The “you only have one chance to get it right” type of thing. And not because it’s just easier now to take tons of shots while reviewing them on the fly. It’s because digital has given me the freedom to practice and practice and practice at no cost, so now I have a better grasp of what ISO I should use under what type of lighting, if I should go with Auto White Balance or change it to fluorescent, if I should shoot the ceremony using Aperture Priority or full Manual, the best f/stop for the scene, etc, etc, etc. I love digital because of this.
But, and there is always a but. I miss the supersaturated colors of Fuji slide film, or the grainy, contrasty images I got with Tri-X. And the exposure latitude? Tri-X was famous for having a super wide exposure latitude. Slide film wasn’t as forgiving, but I think I find more blown out highlights now with digital than back in the old days with slide film. I’ve heard some experts say that digital sensors are very similar to slide film, in the way they see light, and in its limited exposure latitude. I do agree, and kinda lean more towards saying that slide film had a little bit more exposure latitude than most modern digital sensors.
True, when it comes to color saturation, contrast and grain (or noise nowadays) all these can be manipulated during post processing, but back then you got them right out of the camera. And yeah, I know you can program these settings directly on your digital camera, but it just doesn’t have the same “feel”.
So right now I shoot digital 95% of the time. If I need to shoot a wedding, another important event or I’m doing a fashion portrait shoot, I go digital. If I want to shoot tons of pictures during a family gathering, I go digital. If I want a few gritty, black and white street images I’ll grab one of my 35mm rangefinder cameras. If I feel like taking it slow, taking my time to measure light, and carefully compose the shot, I’ll go with my auto-nothing Bronica medium format camera. I guess it’s just a matter of deciding what you want the experience to be while holding the camera and taking the picture, or what kind of image you want to end up with.
If you think about it, a camera is just a tool that helps the photographer get to where he wants to go. If one day I woke up and felt like shooting an awesome landscape, and I found an incredibly cheap 4×5 or 8×10 camera (kinda like when I found my Bronica on eBay recently) I would buy it in a heartbeat.
I think you need to have an open mind. You’ve always done family portraits? Hit the pavement and do some good old street photography for a change. You might like it. You’ve got the latest and greatest Canon DSLR? Go back to basics every so often. Get a Holga or Diana or one of those old one dollar 35mm rangefinder cameras you sometimes find in flea markets. Hell, get one of those do-it-yourself cardboard pinhole cameras and start making images.
In the end all those little things make you a better photographer.
April 17th, 2009 at 7:01 am
I shoot film as a matter of keeping in tune. I also use a few film shots with each shoot to adjust my color to and to have a few backups in case my digits go back to whatever magic land they came from. I’ve shot tens of thousands and never lost information but I still don’t trust this new fangled stuff.
April 17th, 2009 at 7:17 am
I began with film, a Pentax K1000, and used it for years. Then, in the mid 90’s I upgraded to a Canon Rebel G. After a year with that, I bought a used Nikon F3 from ebay. A few years ago, I bought a small digital canon P&S, then upgraded that to a Pentax K10d. In the past year – I’ve collected a whole bunch of old film cameras as I began collecting old M42 glass and the cameras came with it. And then I fell in love with the old 1950s rangefinders… and somewhere in the mix of all this… added a Mamiya RB67 to experience Medium format.
If you ask me what I shoot most, it’s my digital pentax. But, if you ask me what I get the most thrill from – then it’s using one of the classics, the Vitessa T, or an old Leica M2, … there’s nothing quite like holding a peice of history, something heavy and metal and still working like it did when it was first made all those years ago.
April 17th, 2009 at 7:54 am
Yes, every once in a while, I take out my 35mm Nikon camera and shoot film. I’ve learn photography the old school and this is a very good way for me not to forget the real basics of photography.
Although I own several Pro DSLR, there’s nothing like the vibrant result of a film photograph, especially B&W. Just gotta wait and be patient until your pics are processed. But hey, patience is a good virtue to practice anyway =).
Sadly though, true photo laboratory are slowly dissapearing. In my area, there’s only 2 places I know exists and they’re a couple of miles away.
As long as film is still available, I’ll keep using it.
April 17th, 2009 at 8:35 am
I used a film camera for over 20 years before discovering digital photography. Hardly a month goes by without finding or realizing that digital work is superior to film photography. in yet another new way. I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would cling to this outmoded habit. Perhaps people who still use film also use a typewriter, a slide rule and start their cars with a hand crank. Every so often, photography takes a great leap forward. Consider the change from wet plates to cartridge film, changing from b & w to colour, etc. We have almost finished taking a bold new step to a new level. From now on, photography will be defined by memory cards and editing software, rather than by drug stores and 35mm slides.
April 17th, 2009 at 9:41 am
Those who have read my posts know I’m a Nikon guy, all my digital stuff anyway. However, I got my start way back in 19(never mind) with a Cannon AE-1. I still have it, I keep everything, but had not used it for years. Several months ago, I saw some Fuji Superia 200 film “on sale” and decided to buy some batteries and a few rolls. After giving the old girl a good cleaning, I started playing around. Since then, I’ve been using it quite a bit. It’s wonderful. The color is warmer and the prints have more dimension than any DSLR. As for BW, WOW! The camera feels great in my hands, and it’s kind of fun and nostalgic to have to wait, anticipating the results. Also, I love the thought of taking pictures with a 30+ year old peice of gear. I use a “nifty 50″ lense. I took the autowinder off because, as I quickly remembered, you can zip through a roll in seconds.
That said, I’m not about to give up my D3, D90 and S2 Pro digitals. For a sports photographer, DSLR is the only way to go. For portraits and more artistic stuff, it’s hard to beat film. I haven’t been in a darkroom in years.
April 17th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
I have been shooting film for years and waited patiently for the Digial perfomance to favourably compare. 12 Months ago Pantax produced the K20D, which is more than comparable to my aging yet still used and loved ME super. This is not saying film or Digital is one better than the other, nor make better or worse photographers. IMHO only the style of usage changes. For a weekend shot (pre-digital) I would take 6-8 rolls of film of various ASA ratings and faithfully record all the shoting details in my shot log. I’d roll film on and off and change ASA ratings, change from Neg to Slide, manually decide whether to push the film settings a little. It’s what you did !!
Now (post Digital) I still take 6-8 memeory cards, records the location notes in the shot log I still change ASA settings, decide whether to push the recommended settings +ev -ev. It’s what you do !! No matter where you learn the basics, no matter what camera you use, it all still applies. The difference for me is instead of 6-8 rolls of film processed and reviewing contact sheets to choose what images deserve further attention, I now have 5-6 4 gig SD cards of Raw images to do the same with. It’s what you do !!
Practice, persistance and patience make better photographers, Digital gives more options but, a sows ear dosn’t a silk purse make.
April 17th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
because we are accessing our website DIGITAL-photography-school, so the results are not surprised that few people are still shooting with films.
April 17th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Magical moments in photography was/iscentered around film-particularly with slides-Velvia 50/100.More than two decades I was involved.But I felt that stagnation has reached.Then came digital.I liked Nikon system.My present Film camera is Nikon F-6.What a camera it is .And Nikon lenses proved immensely useful.I took to Nikon D200.My switch from slides to C.FCards was smooth.Then I took D-3.I could realise what a good tutor is Digital photography,what perfection in exposure/white balance is needed.As a photographer I feel slides and digital are made for each other,mutually inclusive if one wants to enjoy photography.Both will continue so long human inventiveness continues.
April 17th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Hi Alain,
I too have an RB67 with several lenses and two film backs. I would love to get it out and use it again. Who does good scans for this format ? Many thanks ~Ed
April 18th, 2009 at 2:45 am
I used to have a fully manual Petri 35mm which forced me to learn f-stops, aperture and shutter speed. I super enjoyed it even though I’m no expert and never took the time to take a class. Eventually I got a Canon 35mm point and shoot which took all the work and a lot of the fun out of shooting pictures, but it was easy. Then I got my first digital point and shoot and fell in love.
I just threw out all my film cameras the other day. The only one I kept is a flat cardboard pinhole camera that I would still like to put together and play with someday. Of course, that would require me to learn film processing unless I want to pay for prints that may or may not be what I want.
I love digital because it is so much more fun to play with lighting and effects knowing I won’t have the cost of developing pictures to throw away. I can take a hundred pictures and keep only one if I like. My new digital, a Fuji S1000, is a great camera which I can use manually or on auto setting. It’s very much like an SLR and has a lot of really great features. I am enjoying learning how to use it and actually thinking of taking a photography class so I can learn more about what I’m doing.
April 18th, 2009 at 9:41 am
Hello… I shoot both 6×7 Velvia and Reala film and digital because different conditions and/or client requirements demand the right media. To this day nothing rivals film in the digital world just as film cannot perform in some situations in the digital world.
April 19th, 2009 at 1:26 am
No, I haven’t used a roll of film in my old Pentax for a long time… 24+ months. As much as I was a bit hesitant in using digital media for my photos, I can’t believe how easy and hassle-free a transition it has been, apart from the original outlay to get into it with a decent camera.
Can’t see myself going back to using film, only maybe for the fun of it.
April 19th, 2009 at 4:26 am
Because my best photography has been with film and a manual only camera I struggle with the few digital cameras I have had access to, my children’s. But because I worked fully manual I have had opportunity to instruct several people, one even over the telephone shooting some of their first wedding pictures, on the ISO, aperture, and shutter speed interaction. Some become experts on the first or second piece of equipment they own. Hey, a friend of mine who was an instructor for those learning to ride motorcycles. He wisely told them, Don’t first buy the motorcycle you want. Buy one that can afford to lay down a few times. Once you learn how to control the cycle, then get the one you want. Learn how a camera is to be used first, then get the one that will allow you to do your best work.
April 19th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Film and film cameras still have value in electronically sensitive environments. There are places, such as the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Green Bank, WV, where digital cameras and film cameras with advanced electronics are prohibited. In 1980 I bought a Pentax K1000 SLR. Yes, it still works. This 35mm film camera is completely manual, including focusing ,setting the aperture, and setting the exposure time, with an analog exposure meter as the only onboard electronics. I’m not certain whether the exposure meter would be considered as “advanced electronics” but this is the camera I would hope to be permissible for use at NRAO should I get the opportunity to vist. Then again, I could always remove the battery and rely on educated guesses to setup the shots.
.
April 19th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
This is an interesting poll. I am fully into digital photography owning two compacts and an entry level DSLR.
I find that film is an exciting medium with different feel and always surprising results. Once on CD it is possible to manipulate the results in photoshop.
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:41 am
just bought a canon eos-3 from a friend. i just want to explore infrared photography with this camera. mostly i shoot with my canon 40D. What do I need If I want to do infrared photography with my canon 40D?
I would appreciate your comments. By the way, this is a great site for photo tips. You guys are brilliant. Keep up the good work. More POWER. God Bless.
April 26th, 2009 at 3:33 am
I mostly shoot digital now. When I first got into it I had to trade in all of my film gear (Contax RTS III with Zeiss lenses!!!:( But I kept my little Rollieflex 120. I still shoot with it at times. But it is difficult to get film developed. I have to travel quite a ways to drop it off and they charge outrageous fees only to process…this is because I usually only shoot b/w with this camera.
I hate that I traded my Contax gear, despite the fact that it would be far more difficult now to get any work done on the camera or lenses, should I need it. I LOVED that camera and there is nothing quite like Zeiss!…Other than Leica….ah…dreams.
April 26th, 2009 at 7:53 am
After having just found an infrared B/W 120 film that mimicks the now discontinued Kodak HIE film,(New EFKE 820mn IR) I am going to go back to shooting some medium format film. Then sending that IR film to: dr5 B&W chrome processing service, (http://www.dr5.com/about.html) and have them processed as slide film. My juices are already flowing.
April 26th, 2009 at 10:17 am
So, jj, it is an IR chrome film?? Intriguing. The biggest thing I miss about shooting film is the HIE IR. I am excited to try this as well! Thanks for posting this information.
April 28th, 2009 at 12:15 am
Hey gina, check out http://www.freestylephoto.biz for great sercice on this film. Do you shoot 120 or 35mm? The 35mm has a new “aura” version with no antihatation backing so it “blooms” almost as good as Kodak HIE did. For the 120 version, I use a action called “move” that does almost the same thing after you scan the neg into Photoshop CS3.
April 28th, 2009 at 12:17 am
gina…oops…I just saw that you already mentioned you shoot 120 film….sorry :) :)
April 28th, 2009 at 12:24 am
hi gina again….for digital IF see this site…http://www.pbase.com/allonkira/infrared
May 9th, 2009 at 4:23 am
I changed to digital in 2004. I thought I would use my old film camera for black and white, but that has been a big disaster. Being able to check the result on the screen of your camera is indispensable and saves many expensive film prints.
May 9th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
I needed to buy my DSLR Nikon D80 to realize myself that I LOVE film, these are my reasons:
- No need to carry chargers
- less expensive
-less bulky
- cheaper
- incredible accesories (professional grade) for less than a song
- always a new sensor (film)
- no worries about batteries (mine lasts 1 year)
- you dont attract much attention when shooting
- Film has other tones of color (diferent from digital)
- Film has the feeling of photography is such a magic when you shoot with it, listen to the click and move the lever to move advance the fotogram. (sorry I really like it :)
Sorry these are my opinions I wanted to share with you.
Feel free to visit my photos at http://www.flickr.com/martix
(sorry no professional photos, im just an enthusiast)
June 7th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
I get weirded out when I see people comparing film to megapixels. That has nothing to do with the reasons I choose film. “Megapixels” do not belong in a discussion about film photography anymore than Wacom tablets belong in a discussion about painting. They are not the same at all. For me film, film has contrast, the highlights look good even when burned out, and the blacks are black. I can push process it, I can cross process it, I can scan it, I can print, I can store it, I don’t have to back it up, I don’t need a computer, and frankly, it makes me warm and fuzzy whereas digital photography appears to be the realm of tech nerds who get happy about the latest iPhone apps or stuff they see on Gizmodo. In other words, digital photography to me is not art, it is a still video capture in appearance and in practice.
June 8th, 2009 at 1:43 am
Mike makes some solid points that I mostly agree with, except for the “art” comment. It is a valid comment because it is your oppinion, but here is the way I see it. Art has much more to do with the artist than the method they choose to present it. I am an artist whether I paint with store bought watercolors or make my own from crushed plants, draw reality based pictures or create comic books, use a film camera or a digital. I am the artist, not my tools.
I would like to thank you for bringing that up, though. It is a question I have posed to myself before when I was considering switching formats…your comment made me take my views and other’s into serious account and I have no question anymore.
June 8th, 2009 at 2:57 am
I concur with gina’s remarks.
June 11th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
I just restart ed shoot b&w film and developing it at home. The closing of a Ritz left me to buy about 5 rolls of film and get back to working with my Nikon F2. Something about being envolved in every step. There is nothing automatic about it nor any instant gratification.
August 8th, 2009 at 1:00 am
I took time to read through ALL the comments on Film vs Digital cameras. I own two film cameras – Canon AE-1 and AE-1 program and I have had amazing results from them using both negative and slide films. My son has been prodding me NOT to sell these cameras but to give it to him in case I decide to part with them. I’m somewhat sentimental about owning/and retaining these lovely film cameras. I now own a digital camera and take lots of pictures, but use film nevertheless, on and off.
September 8th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
I like shooting on film for tons of reasons. It’s taught me not to shoot tons of images.
The fact that it costs money, keeps you from shooting everything. It’s a lot like the online blogging community who for the most part have nothing to say, they just like to hear themselves talk.
I think the mentality that it’s always a good idea to take the shot, shows an insecurity about your end product, your basically implying that you don’t know what is good so you shoot everything in hopes that you’ll get something in the end. It’s a shoot down the craps table and it doesn’t need to be that way.
Shooting with a format that has such a beautiful end product and a versatile way of printing really opens up the possibilities of the medium of photography. Your not stuck with a digital censor, your free to shoot whatever film or imaging medium you want. You can put a censor on a large format camera but you can’t put film in a digital camera.
I think my rant focuses towards the art students more so than the digital affecianadoes, but hopefully it broadens your perspective on the topic.
Leave a Reply