I shoot 35 mm because....
- the cameras are small but sophisticated (compared to digital SLR's especially)
- I like the feel of these cameras (my favourites: Contax RTS III, Pentax LX)
- I concentrate much more because I WANT every picture to be great from the start
- I don't have the possibility to check a back screen, therefore I am under no pressure to do anything silly like that
- I like to make myself independent of foreign algorithms, having full (manual) control
- I have a record that I can use in whatever way I want (especially slides - make prints, project, scan for emails etc)
- I don't have to spend any time at all in front of the computer for results (I work as an IT consultant and administrator, boy, do I want a break in the evening/weekend!!)
- it is something special now - everybody has a digital camera, taking the same kind of pictures. My film cameras allow me to produce images that are distinctively different from digital pictures (this does NOT mean simply better quality, it has more to do with feeling and impression)
- I have used 35 mm all my life (over 30 years now), and just now I feel that I start understanding a bit more of what I am doing - I'd rather be a master of analogue than an apprentice amongst thousands of digital apprentices
- I am not a pro, therefore I have the time to develop films and make prints - in fact, I want to spend more quality time with my hobby than just puttting more frames into an hour (typical quote from new digiusers: I have taken already 2000 pictures since last week!!)
Just some of my reasons, there are probably more but I am going for a walk now with the Contax....
There's been some really good responses to this question. I like them all, and agree with so many of them.
I'd like to take the time to mention something that most people probably don't think of. And I hope this doesn't make people think of me as a newage hippy freak.
In my opinion there is a very spiritual aspect to using film. You might of Digital cameras as like going camping in a fully decked out RV. You've got all the essentials of home. You've got a generator, a shower, satellite TV, etc. It's great.
Then think of Film photography as if you are going CAMPING! A sleeping bag, a Tent, and whatever else you can fit into a backpack. Spending the night sleeping under the stars and cooking your food over an open fire.
Working with film is just so much more of a memorable experience. It sticks to your soul and makes you (in my opinion anyway) look at the world from a different angle than the crowd.
And, for the newage hippy freak aspect. why the HELL do we want yet ANOTHER source of EMF near our brains? Aren't we bombarded with enough EMF on a daily basis. There is some belief that man made EMF has all sorts of detrimental effects on the brain. It drains your creativity, your get up and go, hell, in large doses it causes cancer. With Film, you don't have that junk in the air interfering with the natural flows of your creative juices!
Alright, so call me a newage hippy freak, won't bother me
that digital stuff is expensive!
art is about managing compromise
Because in 20, 30, 50 years, you'll still have the negatives.
Originally Posted by scottwesterman
use both! there's no reason (except for a shortage of funds) no to. film is good, and digital is here to stay.
i've heard people say that digital is expensive. yeah it is, but so is using film. i develop my own b&W. to get a bottle of rodinal, i spend 10 bucks (if it is shipped add on 15!!! for shipping), plus the cost of the film and other chemicals. if i shoot color, i send out, and there's 10-20 bucks a roll, plus the cost of film.
i have a new Leica d lux 2 that outperforms my D70 - maybe because it's easier to take that with me than a DSLR. When it comes down to making a beautiful image, both ways CAN get you there, but it's really up to you to get the result.
so, if you can, use both. borrow some equipment. see which you like better. it's fun either way.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
-I like my fully manual cameras which allow me have the film do what I want it to do.
-I've never used a 'Pro' dSLR, but the lack of instant response from the shutter in my Sony Digicam drives me to distraction.
-I spend my days in front of a computer screen, I don't want to do it for fun.
-Developing B&W in my basement is much less environmentally damaging than would be printing digi pics with a printer.
-35mm is fast, be it with a RF or SLR.
-The dynamic range of a good film & dev combo is stunning.
-I can do low-light shots with pushed D-400 or D-3200 that cannot be done in digital w/o a flash.
-I use a 40 yr old Soviet RF and a 30 yr old Japanese fixed lens RF and a 20 year old Japanese SLR. They give me stunning results...It's the film and developer which get better with time; no need to change the hardware, 'cause film cameras don't become technologically obsolete.
But all in all, 'cause 35mm is fun and it's what floats my boat; and a man cannot ask for more than that.
Max Power, he's the man who's name you'd love to touch! But you mustn't touch! His name sounds good in your ear, but when you say it, you mustn't fear! 'Cause his name can be said by anyone!
I shoot film just because I like it better. But I don’t think my personal preferences matter to you. So decided for yourself what do you want, both mediums are very capable. Do film or do digital or do both one none.
Originally Posted by scottwesterman
Still shoot 35mm film, because the color palette is better, and IMO, Velvia is still sharper than even the best DSLR.
Lots of reasons
At high ISO's I find grain pleasing, digital noise annoying and ugly.
The tactile experience, I like handling negatives. Can't do that with a jpeg.
Shooting 35mm film is much more intuitive (for myself at least). I take better photos. With digital I suffered from system overload, too much information for this gal. It gave me a headache.
I have all my negatives and slides stored safely away. Last time I checked they were all still there. Plus I have cases of my Father's slides documenting our family for the last 50 years. I have CD's of digital images taken three years ago that are now blank.
Digital technology is advancing too fast for me to keep up. The digital slr I bought 2 or 3 years ago (and sold last year for half of what I paid) was upgraded within months of my purchase, and once again since then. Good for the camera companies, bad for me. Film on the other hand is already outdated technology (according to some :rolleyes: ) however as long as it's still available it's a non-issue. At least I can keep up with it!
Film shooters are more fun to hang out with.
Film grain is often beautiful and interesting. Digi noise is to be merely tolerated (by me). Yes! Film's artifacts are a part of it's character, in a good way. Maybe because it's what's been around and therefore I am used to it, but I like it!
And finally, an imaging system whose sensors are removable, replaceable, updateable, by the user, and diverse in character is a stroke of genius as far as I'm concerned.