|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
why not shoot film?
Working in digital yes, it's works, it's fast, it's convenient and works great for when you make a living shooting. Headshots, commercial, weddings, fashion, whatever. It's hard to compete these days if you're not shooting digital. But for more creative work or "art" work: why not shoot film? No i don't mean that headshots or commercial work, etc, isn't or can't be creative. I'm just talking about those times where speed isn't essential. Those times where you can take a breath and just go make something cool. Who's got some film shots they want to share? I don't care if it's art, commercial, or whatever. Let's see some film. Jul 13 14 02:48 pm Link Mark Reeder Photography wrote: then why not paint a painting? Jul 13 14 03:00 pm Link After shooting purely digital for the last 10 years... .. I've dragged out the Mamiya 645's and the Nikon FM2's.. and been and bought $200 worth of film.. I'm in the process (sic) of getting all the developing equipment together.. watch this space.. Jul 13 14 03:01 pm Link I choose not to shoot film if I can help it because it is more expensive, involves a bunch of nasty chemicals, is potentially hazardous to the environment as well as the practitioner, and does not produce images that are in any way superior (just different). Folks who want to shoot film are welcome to do so. I'll pass, thank you. Been there, done that, don't wanna do it again. Jul 13 14 03:04 pm Link Everything in my portfolio is shot on film - mostly 8 x 10. Jul 13 14 03:05 pm Link I have no interest in shooting film but I can see why some people would. Jul 13 14 03:05 pm Link There is absolutly no reason you can't shoot digital the same way you shoot film. I have done plenty of shoots where I have shot no more than 2 "rolls" when shooting digital. Spray and pray is for hacks and just because you can do it doesn't mean you should. Jul 13 14 03:10 pm Link L A U B E N H E I M E R wrote: That looks like Bernini. Awesome. Painting is it's own beast. Photography has it's own place. The only thing they have in common is that they are 2 dimensional representations of reality. And sculpture, well that's something entirely different altogether. Jul 13 14 03:16 pm Link AJScalzitti wrote: Who said anything about spraying and praying? not everybody has a scanner you know....I got to get one. Might just start shooting everything in film. Ahh, money tho..digital is easier, showing clients their options right away. Jul 13 14 03:21 pm Link Michael DBA Expressions wrote: Whoa, "does not produce images that are in any way superior". Really? Jul 13 14 03:22 pm Link Mark Reeder Photography wrote: Careful... nobody is wrong when we're talking subjective opinions here. Jul 13 14 03:24 pm Link Good Egg Productions wrote: If there was no real right and wrong to things...well then, I don't even know what to say about that. This is close to soap box right here... Jul 13 14 03:28 pm Link I have about 20 film cameras ( I'm a camera hoarder) I don't shoot much film because it gets really expensive. But I have shot film in the past. Jul 13 14 03:30 pm Link Whats film? Jul 13 14 03:36 pm Link Images by MR wrote: Well you know, I respect those who actually made a career shooting film. Shooting professionally after digital came on the scene, well that's just easy by comparison. In ten years pros will be using iphones to make a living. Jul 13 14 03:40 pm Link Why not? Money. I have a film camera and would love to use it but I can't spend on that right now. Jul 13 14 03:41 pm Link I have boxes and boxes of film that I'm currently going through. The next step is scanning....how I wish it was digital. Jul 13 14 03:46 pm Link Marin Photography NYC wrote: Dude, it's less than a case of beer. Jul 13 14 03:51 pm Link A-M-P wrote: ^^^This is why for me. It does get expensive. Jul 13 14 04:00 pm Link Svetlana Muerte wrote: I have 13 rolls sitting undeveloped in a drawer for who knows how long who knows what is in there lol Jul 13 14 04:07 pm Link Mark Reeder Photography wrote: When you have a steady job it's easy, I don't. Jul 13 14 04:08 pm Link Marin Photography NYC wrote: He is welcome to send to our film fund and will gladly shoot it Jul 13 14 04:10 pm Link Why not?    DK Jul 13 14 04:10 pm Link While I'm sure the splitters can divide the lumps differently, I think you can generally divide photographers into six groups with respect to shooting film: 1. Those who learned photography before digital was an option and have no intention of learning digital. 2. Those who learned photography before digital was an option and, once digital developed into a serious option, added digital to their repertoire but also kept shooting film. 3. Those who learned photography before digital was an option and switched to primarily shooting digital once they became comfortable with it. 4. Those who learned photography in the digital age and, once they become familiar with the technical aspects of photography, chose to add film to their repertoire but also kept shooting digital. 5. Those who learned photography in the digital age and, once they become familiar with the technical aspects of photography, switched to primarily shooting film. 6. Those who learned photography in the digital age and have no intention of learning film. If you think about the title question from the perspective of each of those, I expect you can predict the six categories of answers you'll get. Why not shoot film? 1. "I always do" 2. "I do when it's right" 3. "Been there, done that, don't need to do it again" 4. "I sometimes do" 5. "I often do" 6. "Don't be ridiculous" There are two main reasons I still shoot film: 1) I feel a greater sense of accomplishment when I make an image I'm proud of with film than when I make an image I'm proud of with digital because I believe it's less challenging to do so with digital, and 2) the process of shooting with large format cameras is therapeutic for me. FWIW, I'm in group 2. I shoot both film and digital, and I don't downgrade either based on the relative strengths of the other. They're different media, each appropriate for some purposes and not for others. Jul 13 14 04:10 pm Link Mark Reeder Photography wrote: Can't see them anymore, as before, when they were common. Jul 13 14 04:11 pm Link A-M-P wrote: +1 Jul 13 14 04:13 pm Link I got rid of all my old film gear years ago. In a typical model shoot, I may produce 250 initial images. That would be a lot of film. In contrast to film, I can immediately view and delete some unwanted images right from the camera. I can review them with the model there and reshoot a pose if necessary. 30 minutes after a model is gone, I'm editing shoot images on my computer in way that was never possible with film. I may spend hours editing images now, but it's much more efficient than the hours I used to spend in my darkroom. If, all I ever shot were travel landscapes, hanging on to my old film camera gear might have made sense, though even with that I like being able to review an image immediately after taking it. Jul 13 14 04:14 pm Link Just take a film camera with you on the shoot. When you are finished shooting digital switch to the film camera. Wouldn't hurt just to use one or two rolls. Just take your time, breath, and press the shutter. Great images will come. Jul 13 14 04:21 pm Link why not shoot film? Jul 13 14 04:32 pm Link Digital Kythe Image wrote: Nice. Jul 13 14 04:32 pm Link Still enjoy shooting with my Nikon F3 HP's, just not for commercial work. I find myself being more deliberate, slows me down and makes me think more. Even though I own a 'host' of modern Nikon's, the F3 is still the best design ever! Jul 13 14 04:36 pm Link Fred Ackerman wrote: if you have an fe in excellent condition, let me know. Jul 13 14 04:39 pm Link I primarily shoot B&W shoot film using view cameras for my portrait and nude figure work.  [/url]Jul 13 14 04:40 pm Link Michael DBA Expressions wrote: +1 Jul 13 14 04:44 pm Link Michael DBA Expressions wrote: +1 Jul 13 14 05:16 pm Link When I first started shooting digital, many still felt that a scanned 35mm slide still provided a much better quality image than produced by digital cameras of the time. That's changed. Jul 13 14 05:18 pm Link 
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica I have nothing against digital, I just prefer to shoot film. My entire portfolio is shot with film and a 30 year old Pentax manual camera. It moves almost as slow as I do...  Jul 13 14 05:26 pm Link Honestly, I just prefer digital. I find people hang on to this notion that film is somehow more "artistic". As if shooting film adds to your credibility. You can slow down with digital as well and use a small memory card if you feel you need the handicap to "stimulate" your creativity. Jul 13 14 05:28 pm Link Michael DBA Expressions wrote: -1 Jul 13 14 05:38 pm Link I'll shoot at least 4 or 5 rolls at every shoot I've done. Love film! Jul 13 14 05:44 pm Link |
