The argument of film vs. digital in regards of photography is a question that has been asked since the introduction of the digital camera.
In my opinion this is not a fair comparison. An oil painting would not be compared to a water colour both would just be commended for their individual merits, both having distinct strengths and weaknesses in certain scenarios or aspects of the medium.
I have took photography seriously for about 3 years now. Experimenting every chance I get trying to learn new things and replicate commercial looks. Up until this year I have shot almost exclusively digitally. The thought of the added complications and risk surrounded by film was always unappealing to me.
It took a visit to a local charity shop which had recently inherited a collection of cameras from a photographer that had passed on. I purchased a Yashica Mat TLR Camera which took medium format film producing 6x6 images onto the negative.
I wasted no time in using my new camera which was fully manual; all exposure working outs had to be done by me with no aid from an on board light meter.
I liked how the camera worked, the 100% manual approach to photography was a lot more rewarding than the usual point, expose, view which was the norm with digital.
I had used 35mm several times before, developing and printing myself; with limited success. However this was my first time using a fully manual camera and also the first time shooting with medium format. With this in mind I did not expect much from the shoot and headed to the darkroom to develop my film with little expectation.
I developed the film in a similar way to 35mm doubling the chemical amounts to cover the larger film service.
Once the development process was complete I was relived and surprised to see my 100% manual work on the shoot had resulted in 12 beautiful 6x6 analogue negatives.
I then began to print from the negatives, something that had been one of the major drawbacks that had kept me from using film in the past. Printing paper is expensive; around £30 for a box of 100 10x8 sheets. A lot of which would be wasted in the pursuit of the perfect print.
After viewing my images as positives on a contact sheet I selected a couple of images that I would print. After several prints, fine tuning by means of selective exposure and printing filters I was eventually rewarded with a black and white print with rich blacks, white whites and stunning grain something that was far superior to my initial test print.
At this point I was converted, not to put down my digital camera but to the fact that the traditional silver based approach to photography had its own uses and merits.
I instantly began researching different cameras, looking for a medium format camera that I could not only learn with but one that would allow me to express my creativity without limits.
I knew hasselblad was that camera of choice for many top professionals but that was out of my budget. I went for a Mamiya RB67 Pro S described as the workhorse of the pros. I listed my Yashica mat which had been the reason for my sudden love of film on ebay and made an £130 profit and along with several other vintage cameras from my collection funded my purchase of the Mamiya.
So now I have a rose tinted view of film does that mean ill no longer be using my digital camera? No. Digital still has the upper hand. Whilst film has its certain aesthetic quality and âone offâ originality, digital is safe, proven and incomparably manageable.
If I was commissioned to do a wedding or anything for that matter I wouldnât even consider using film. Taking a risk with other people memories or projects in which I had been entrusted to envision and capture for sake of personal preference isnât logical.
So for now digital wins, but film certainly put up a fight. Something of which I would never of expected myself to say only a year ago.
|
