Hello, APUG! This past summer, I stumbled back into the world of analogue photography, after having wanted to go back to it since about 2009. I quit shooting film in 2004 in lieu of digital. Now, I should probably let you know I've been lurking behind the scenes on APUG for about a month or so, and I've read so much and learned so much already from this website. One thing that seems common on here is people shoot film until switching to digital for whatever reason for anywhere from 6 months to an entire decade but be seemingly unsatisfied with digital and decide to move back to film. Well, that isn't the case with me. No, rather, I just liked the vintage look of certain films and cameras and thought it would be neat for a special "look" once in a while. I was actually quite pleased with my digital results. I guess, though, as many things in life, things didn't go as expected with film. Initially, I only had an old Canon A35F Rangefinder and Fuji Superia film. Mix that with a low quality lab, and my shots came out less than stellar. Then I inherited an old Canon point and shoot from 1988 (which I have yet to use, hehe). Then a couple months ago, I got myself a proper film camera (in my mind), a Nikon F80 for an excellent deal, considering it's great condition. Now, I could use my Nikon lenses! I started trying different films and found a higher quality lab and now, looking back at the digital photographs I have amassed over the years, 85% of them that I thought were great before have lost their luster. I am really realizing the truer rendition of colour, tones, highlights, etc. in film as well as not wanting to waste frames (and by extension, money) means that I try that much harder to get an excellent shot and my photography has improved overall. My photos aren't so over the top contrasty with film, I love that! I just love the look and resolution of film and the overall workflow and how much better attention I take to detail when out shooting and oh, I could go on. I am now becoming ever so much more frustrated with digital photos I take. I don't get it. I see most of the world's good photographers (amateur or pro; known or unknown) still take exceptional photos digitally. I mean, film photos are equally as exceptional, just in different ways. I'm clearly missing something because I too should be able to attain those results with digital. Maybe film just works better for me personally? What's next? I shall be obtaining a Nikon FG very quickly and shall thus learn more about manual focus photography (which I only did for a few months with my first dSLR, and I'm sure manual focus works better on a manual focus camera). After that, hopefully a medium format, either a TLR or non-clunky 120 SLR. Maybe I can finally try out those more vintage looks with the Nikon FG? Also, despite my frustrations with digital, like I said, there is a lot of fantastic digital work out there. Because I regularly work with the format (though much less so now than a few months ago) I see a lot of hate and misconceptions directed at the format on APUG, and it leads me to almost want to defend it. Digital is not the antichrist . I also find it a bit strange that scanners aren't supposed to be discussed here, I mean, yes, it connects to a computer and is for creating computer files of your analog photos, but it still deals directly with analogue photography. I guess I can understand a bit as you guys probably want to keep this site as traditional as possible, but it is still strange nonetheless. I mostly do urban photography, consisting of street and architectural photography, but I also love doing portraits, landscapes, plants, as well as new concepts to allow me to grow as a photographer. Oh, and I live in Edmonton.