snegron7
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #11 · Should I start shooting film again? | |
retrofocus wrote:
I rebooted my film photography skills 10 years ago after I was handed a free Beseler 45MXT enlarger with enlarger lens, and I was curious to set up my own darkroom to make silver gelatin prints from film. I started this after having fully moved to digital photography in 2005. Here are some pros and cons to consider when doing film photography again:
+ It is kind of addictive: I tried all kind of negative sizes to make prints of including 35 mm, 6x6 and 6x7 cm, and 4x5" sizes. In the end I mostly use to this day 35 mm. Easier to handle and walk around with my Leica M camera than with any of my medium format cameras. The resolution from a 35 mm negative is more than enough to make great 11x14" size darkroom prints.
+ Capturing things only film reveals: this is IMO a big plus to use film - capturing halos/highlights in a way only film can provide, also seeing how light can bend around dark silhouettes is something digital does not capture as well.
+Quality: as a plus, some film - especially slide film as Velvia 50 - provides astonishing colors in specific shooting situations like sunrises/sunsets etc. This is hard to get from a modern digital camera the same way without need of a lot of post processing of the digital file. But overall, this is more the exemption than the standard - I find color negative film can be more easily copied with digital getting to a very similar look. The same is true for monochrome - I am using B&W film just to enjoy its process but not to get something "better" than what digital and especially monochrome digital cameras can do now (with exemption what I stated in the bullet point above). Original film grain is seen by many film photographers as a plus to have - I have never been a fan of it to be honest. I prefer low grain film at low ISO for this reason - but this is subjective.
- Cost: this has become a more significant issue in recent years especially since the pandemic when prices for some film gear and film itelf started skyrocketing. Biggest culprit for many - me included - is the staggering increases of film price. SLR cameras can still be obtained for around $150 in good condition, but rangefinder camera prices remain high for brands from Leica, Voigtlander, or Nikon.
- Film processing: I put it down as a negative even it has the positive side of learning and enjoying the process to develop and process the film yourself and not using an external lab. Avoiding an external lab keeps you in control of the whole process which is a plus, but it is also very time consuming to develop your own films (normally this is still the fastest step!), scanning (can be tedious for various reasons), and potentially printing either in the darkroom or from digitized film photos. I cannot see myself doing film potentially for a professional basis - digital clearly has the edge here regarding time needed for post processing. For a hobby basis - like in my case - it is fine since I can vest the time without external pressure to deliver.
- Travel: big con nowadays with stronger airport scanners present which can affect more sensitive film above ISO 400. Hand-checking film at the safety check is a possibility, but it can be tedious in a crowded check-in to ask TSA for checking each film separately. It was one big factor for me to upgrade to a monochrome based digital Leica M 246 camera to take this one with me instead of Leica M film camera for travel involving flights.
- Quality: as a con, the sharpness with 35 mm negative film is never as good as with a modern digital camera. Better sharpness is obtained with larger film size, but then the whole camera gear also gets bigger.
From your description above it sounds that your film journey might be more a short one to break from digital for once. You explored one of the most difficult parts of the film processing steps: scanning/digitization. Many hurdles here to get things right. It took me years to optimize my film scanning process and to get the white balance right close to the original film. This starts which kind of digitization method to use (digital camera with NagtiveLabPro for example or film scanners with scan software like Vuescan just to mention a few).
When already having a digital camera as you mentioned, you should vest in a decent post processing software program like Lightroom. Darktable is another good free choice but from own experience with it less intuitive to use. ...Show more →
You pretty much nailed all the pros and cons of shooting film that I can think of!
I currently have several film cameras in near pristine condition (three Canon FT QL's, two Pentax Super Programs, two Nikon F3HP's, a Nikon F with standard prism, Nikon F with FTN Photomic Viewfinder, Nikon F2A, Nikon F5, Nikon F100, Nikon FM2N, Nikon F80, Nikon S2 Rangefinder, Mamiya 645J, Mamiya 645E, Mamiya RB67, and I probably missed a few other film cameras I can't remember right now).
Regardless of all my film equipment, there are two things I don't have;
1. A good subject/location to photograph (I live in Florida, and other than the occasional bird, there is nothing of visual interest here to capture).
2. Resources (money and time) to travel to visually interesting locations outside of Florida.
So, my film equipment spends its life stored away. I recently learned the hard way that you need to "exercise" (use) film cameras frequently so they won't lock up. I lost two good cameras (a Nikon FM2N and a Nikon F3) because of lack of use.
|
) and hearing the occasional ker-click of the Nikkormat's shutter will likely wear off quickly, especially considering what the Z can do. I may think otherwise one day. One day I may even buy an AF lens! But first I should at least finish processing the hundreds of slides still unviewed resting in their storage containers.
