Why I'll never shoot film...

[@JamesPopsysPhoto]

The first 1,000 people to use this link will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare: skl.sh/jamespopsys07211 Thanks as always for watching everyone, I'll do my best to keep the videos coming throughout the next couple of months regardless of my sleeping patterns, or lack of them... :)

[@JustinPaulPictures]

We just had our second baby (2 in two years, yikes), so I totally hear you on sleep and venturing afar. Congrats to you both and good luck - it’s an incredible, unprecedented new adventure. Get ready to use that portrait lens/lenses. ;)

[@maxencelemoine4190]

Film is not for everyone. It is a complete different process compared to digital. I shoot films (99.9%of my shots) and I wouldn't trade my cameras and my darkroom for the best dslr in the world. But it doesn't prevent me from loving beautiful digital images. In the end, it is all about photography, people do whatever they want to, no one can judge of it is a good or bad thing. People tell me they don't understand why I shoot films, I should enter the modern world and so on... Honestly, I don't care that people find that stupid or don't understand. I'm having so much fun with that, why should I change?

[@BARMAXAR]

That's perfect! ❤️

[@lensman5762]

I do both. I use both alongside each other, but my main interest is in film. I find digital sterile and boring. I have to be honest and say that for commerce and colour work, the digital process is difficult to beat. When it comes to personal projects , for me the film is still unsurpassed.

[@daviehudson4270]

I’m about 70/30 in my film to digital use … film is for work and digital is for playing

[@redbank542]

100%

[@GutS7u6]

I have recently started with film. I wanted to buy a nice looking old camera, but am a tight git so wanted one that I could use. Anyway, I am enjoying dabbling with film (I am purely a hobby photographer) and it is teaching me more patience and thought with the process. I have also started buying different film cameras to use. I now have a small 110 camera, 2x cheap lomo 35mm cameras, 1x 'proper' Werra 35mm camera and a cheap Holga 120 med format. I have so far used the lomo 35s and the holga...

[@bencoyte4445]

Film got me back into photography. I used to shoot video for a living in tv news, then stopped picture taking altogether other than digital happy snaps of the kids. Then I pulled out my old OM4 SLR and rediscovered photography. Now I shoot both media, playing with ancient medium format cameras when I feel a need to slow down, and shooting digital for almost all the reason you mention.

[@gerryphilpott9766]

My daughter asked to take my old Nikon F3 back to college with her this fall and is using it now. I love that and actually made me think about film again as I help her get familiar with it. She also just found out a friend of hers in Boston only uses his film camera so they'll go out and do some city shots soon enough. Go figure. I love that they are into photography and will probably learn a lot about their likes/dislikes and the how to get the images they like this way. To be honest, I'm so glad there wasn't digital or Lightroom, etc. when I started in 1979. I had so much fun and was really proud of many of my shots as they came out of the camera that I would have gone crazy with all the editing options, people's opinion, etc. I'm glad she can almost go back in time a little and just enjoy the stripped down version of it.

[@aaronramos6056]

That's why i shoot on film sometimes too. So i can only focus on the act of taking the picture and norhing else. No lightroom or what ever...

[@dimitrijekrstic7567]

@@aaronramos6056 lightroom is an additional option, not a requirement. You can have the same amount of fun and not use lightroom or post on social media. Both of your comments make you seem like you believe everyone is using social media and has to use it. Not really true, is it? It's your choice. You could just as well post your film photos on social media after scanning them, but you aren't doing that, are you? You can choose

[@powbobs]

Lots of young people use film cameras. K-pop Idols, especially females, also like using film cameras and that has influence on younger people.

[@gerryphilpott9766]

@@powbobs That's true. However, I just got a used film camera that works with my current lenses and am enjoying the experience and "look" again. Digital will be primary of course but film does get you to pay more attention to the process which is never a bad thing.

[@powbobs]

@@gerryphilpott9766 Definitely

[@jessejayphotography]

I shoot both because it’s fun! FF in digital and Medium format 6x6 for film. I think large format portraits can’t be replicated in digital at the moment and the look is amazing.

[@JohnSmith-oo9mr]

As someone who only shoots film, I’m 17 not just an old person who never switched, I agree with this. I mostly do editorial photography and environmental portraits where film is easier. But for landscape film is a very different kettle of fish. I love your style with digital and think your work flow is amazing. It’s nice how people can have so many different approaches to photography and make awesome work, I think that’s what makes it so special.

[@zka77]

I can't even begin to think about any situation where film would be easier than or superior to digital. People shoot film for all kinds of irrational reasons and nothing else.

[@Ericbjohnston5150]

@@zka77 A film shooter makes a better photographer. A film shooter has to really think the shot. gotta think the settings. A bad shot is wasted film which is wasted money. A digital photographer just shoots willy nilly. Pros not included.

[@finleycartmell5223]

@@zka77 that's literally the entire point. And the unique look that film provides is a completely rational reason. Film is imperfect, mistakes get made, but the lack of perfection is what gives the images more feeling and makes them more special. I shoot both film and digital, and as good as digital is, film provides exactly what digital lacks.

[@Adrian-wd4rn]

@@zka77 What a dumb take. LOL. A 6x6 negative holds FAR more resolution than a puny little 35mm dslr can produce. Digital medium formats are just beginning to catch up to the resolution of film. And that's only considering resolution, not color accuracy and overall detail capture.

[@nemrody7828]

@@zka77 - lower ISO options (for the more experimental) - bigger resolution on medium format and large format - forces the photographer to really think about what he is shooting, and how he does it Also, you don't need to insult everyone you disagree with. Makes for bad credibility.

[@scruvydom]

Fair enough, though I will say that any photographer deserves the experience at least once of seeing their shot on a piece of slide film. As a landscape photographer in particular, because the way slide film renders natural light is absolutely out of this world and totally incomparable to anything you can experience digitally.

[@ytuberization]

Couldn’t agree more. A good slide film image on a light table is unsurpassed by any digital medium…colors of Provia, Ektachrome and Velvia are outstanding compared to Bayer sensor output

[@V_666.]

I switched back to film because I shoot almost all black and white and was tired of making digital edits to mimic film. I like the way film looks and how film cameras feel. to each their own though

[@AndersBjornTH]

Can you be a hipster at 70? Dumped digital for a Zorki that is even older. The both of us are enjoying our golden years.

[@AndersBjornTH]

@Lawrie Conole Mine is a Zorki 1 that I ordered from Ukraine. It was delivered in excellent condition to Northwest Thailand in less than a month. I also bought a Fed 2. Next on my list is a Zorki 4 or maybe a Kiev 4a. Photos of my two cameras are posted on my IG @andrew_mhs Cheers!

[@EstelonAgarwaen]

As Long as you have fun taking photos, does it matter?

[@saramulry]

I didn’t start really learning how to wield a camera until I traded out my dads film Canon for a digital. Being able to see what I shot & make adjustments to create what I wanted, with more chances to shoot made my learning curve so much quicker!

[@keptkozy]

Similar story - Learned on a digital cam I found in storage at work. Instant feedback helped develop my skills and understanding faster.

[@DevI-vl7gp]

Opposite for me! Loved the simplicity of figuring out what exactly the 3 dials did on film, vesus the menus and hundreds of buttons on digital. I actually hated taking photos before I found a film camera in an old work cabinet.

[@dimitrijekrstic7567]

@@DevI-vl7gp manual mode would givr you exactly the same experience on a dslr...go with manual focus if you wanna get your retro high, and enjoy having the technology to shoot hundreds of photos on a 32gb card... Made a mistake? You could possibly fix it in lightroom. Wanna know how close you got to the perfect pic? Just preview it right away on your dslr. You lose so much by going to film. I understand the whole material vibe and retro vibe, and the fact that they can often be found quite cheap nowadays, but to say that film is somehow easier to start with is just wrong.

[@powbobs]

Quicker doesn’t mean better.

[@saramulry]

@@powbobs Unless you know my work and think I’m a bad photographer I’m not sure why you’d feel the need to say that.

[@davep6603]

I was expecting to hear a trashing of film photography, but this was a well thought out answer as to why you might want to shoot film, and why you might not. Great video, love your work!

[@keptkozy]

Shooting film is super neat, but so much of the content around it romanticizes the process without being clear to newbies that this is not the route to go if you're just getting into photography. If you're just starting out, I cannot imagine how frustrating the lack of instant feedback could be. Seeing your mistakes in real time is one of the greatest benefits of shooting digital. If you're just starting out, ignore the hipsters and get you a moderately priced (maybe used) APS-C camera, a light room subscription and go. If you're still super into it in like 6 months, sink some real money into it. Also, totally thought you were just joking about the ponies. Put a smile on my face. Congrats on the little one!

[@bencushwa8902]

I would never shoot film for paid work, largely for the exact reasons you listed: I like having a large pool of shoots to choose from, I like being able to fine-tune the edits, and everything needs to be backed up. But I love film for small personal projects. It does force me to slow down and think more, and since I develop and scan my own shots, I do feel more of a connection to the work. The great thing about photography is that there's no right or wrong way to do it, only different tools for different people. Best of luck with the baby!

[@JadeNeoma]

I would never expect someone like you (as in a pro photographer) to shoot film most of the time. But it might be fun to get a film camera just to mess with.

[@zacharybennett3249]

James 1 year later with a fully baked baby: "Why Film Photography is the Photographer's Ultimate Legacy" "(And by fully baked I mean that it's been born and living for a while not baked in a oven. OH a sheep!)"

[@kucken64]

It was nice to hear someone giving considered reasons as to why a particular format wasn't for them rather than walking out the same old clichés about hipsters or dad bods.

[@selzzaW]

As someone who shoots film and digital, I appreciate that there are those who only shoot with one or the other. Sometimes I like to see people shoot film, and sometimes I like to see people shoot digital.

[@Bill.Pearson]

"...because she's never given birth Look! Squirrel!" I swear, I thought that's what you were doing, because, well, you know... I did not expect real ponies.

[@Martin-nu6ym]

Great thing about youtube - I have no desire to go back to using film but I sure do enjoy watching other people doing it. Those videos are enough to keep the spark at bay for me and just appreciate the dedication film photographers have in the art. :)

[@markattardo]

Shooting (35mm) film is a bit nostalgic for me. I found copies of the slr cameras I used to own. Clicking the shutter after finding and framing a composition is oddly satisfying. Hunting for old lens bargains is a pastime on it's own. But to each their own😉

[@wido123123]

I started my photography journey with film, when digital was already a thing, because getting started was considerably cheaper (a Nikon F70 costed me 1/10 of a D60). Since then, I already moved intop digital realm, but the leasons lerned from film still stick to me. Whenever I take a photo of something, I only take 1 or 2, because I already know what am I looking for. And I never take those "just in case", because I already know what am I doing. Which doesn't guarantee I'm getting a good photo (most of the time, it's not), just that the end result is going to be what I was trying to achieve in that moment

[@TheBigNegative-PhotoChannel]

I think a lot of people here asking that you shoot film is because of the reasons you don't want to. Film is nerve-wrackingly unsafe and you have to be more concentrated if you shoot with it. which results in a more interesting video for us to watch. 🤷‍♂️

[@joeltunnah]

Film is not “nerve-wrackingly unsafe”. LOL 😂 If anything the exposure latitude is a relief after shooting digital where blown highlights are a constant worry. With film you almost can’t blow the highlights, although you don’t want your midtones to go much below 1 or 2 stops underexposed.

[@Adrian-wd4rn]

@@joeltunnah Unless we're talking about slide film ;)...Oh, half a stop of over exposure? Heres some white!...Half a stop under? Because you barely messed up the zone system? DARK!...But I love it, because when you get the shot, man, do you get the damn shot.

[@spyhunter6411]

Congrats on the baby! My wife and I had our first in January, it's a joy. Things get really neat at the 5 to 6 month mark, lots of new emotions and laughs.

[@pixlplague]

I totally agree with your logic about film. I’m the same, when I started « photography » when I was a kid it was on film, but I sucked too much to get any return on my work! Digital allowed me to get -marginally- better. I also sympathise with your O - ooh a pony!! :D

[@paulferguson1921]

Nice to see a photo of water that is not a long exposer.

[@jockturner1547]

While I think your points are fantastic and completely valid! But I do think because of your concerns and reasons why you wouldn't is exactly why you should! Even if it's for a single day trip to go out and have a bit of fun. I mostly shoot digital but I do own a huge collection of film cameras that I do enjoy to just change things up every now and then. I tend to see it as, when I'm going to try and get actually good photos that I plan to use I will always take digital. When I just want to have fun and appreciate photography for what it is and I'm completely fine without getting any decent shots because the actual experience is such a difference that it's just fun, in of itself! Up to you man, but I think it could be fun for you to just give it a go!

[@tulenik71]

My reasons why I don't want shoot film anymore are somewhat different (but also similar in some ways). I am 1971 so when I started with photography as 10 yrs old the only way was chemical process and I know it very well (moreover, I am chemist, so I got even more intimate knowledge). Nowadays, shooting (and processing) film can be very expensive hobby when compared to late 80s/early 90s. Even getting equipment is much harder. So I am not quite convinced about quality for price issue. Then there is the learning process. Too much ways for "techno"onanism (chemoonanism?) with developers etc. which in most cases only distracts from photography as such. There are problems with longevity of the shots - both negatives and positives, especially when beginner really don't have a clue what is important (silver is not that stable in the presence of fixer remains). There is environmental cost (almost all developing agents are toxic and cancerogenic) and of course it is resource hungry, too (silver crisis in the 80s). After buying my first digital compact camera (3 Mpix Oly Camedia) I never used my 35 mm compact camera (Oly mju:1) and I rarely used my 35 mm SLRs (Pentax and Nikon). After buying my first dSLR I completely ditched all my film equipment and gladly never looked back. (And as a bonus I have zero problems using old Pentax lenses with K10 or K3ii.) However, you can obtain RAW files from (some) scanners, VueScan is able to save DNG if the scanner supports sending raw data.

[@kennygo8300]

I started shooting film in 1976. Even with a digital camera, I can't seem to shake the old habits of attempting to think every shot completely through before releasing the shutter. I know I miss a LOT of good shots because of this. Change is hard.

[@stuartcarden1371]

I agree with the idea that having constraints can help you improve and or force you to get more creative. I don't shoot film much these days; perhaps only 2 or 3 rolls a year but I find having my iso locked in and dealing with issues around having to keep shutter speeds relatively fast means I have to work out ways to get shots that are easy with digital but tricky with film. It helps me to think about lighting and composition in particular in a more detailed way. Plus knowing you're having to pay for every shot certainly focuses the mind. As for editing, I'm not a fan unfortunately, so I like to make my decisions in terms of the look of my photos beforehand as much as possible, which film also lets me do....well, forces me to do. Edit: typos (there are probably more)

[@johnyutzey6504]

My sentiments as well. I could have written this with two modifications: I shoot maybe 6-8 rolls per year, and I do edit my photos (including scanned film shots), but with a light touch -- nothing heavy. Like you, I try to get my shots as good as I can SOOC.

[@D_R_Martin]

I shoot a mix of film and digital because I like the variety of experiences to keep me from getting bored. This is especially important where I live during the winter months because the terrain is a bit blah until Spring comes, and it is a rural area, so street photos are a bit bland as well. Anyway, we all have our reasons, and it is all about getting out and having fun regardless of the medium.

[@all-ainzy7188]

For me I do a hit of both, I have always shot digital but as the last couple of years have gone I got swayed to somewhat downgrading to a 5d classic. Being more closer to the film style I fell back in love with photography and have now started hiking and gone for only film at the time being. A zenit 12xp that my partner picked up for £13 and then I'm just using the cheapest film I can and really enjoying the wait of seeing if everything I took has turned out as I hoped! Just been reccomend the channel and definitely going to subscribe to keep up! 👍

[@jasmachugh4222]

The thing I don't get is the editing, both digital and film shooters. That's why I love instant photography, instant tangible photos and no editing. Love what comes out of it the way it is, that's the charm of it!

[@finleycartmell5223]

You're talking as if you can't shoot both? Film and digital provide completely different experiences and results, that's why I shoot both. Film is imperfect, that's why it's so great, technical perfection of the image doesn't matter, it's more about the feeling and emotion. Digital gives you a much more clinical and technically perfect image, which is great, but at times lacks the character that film images often have. But the upside is you have flexibility in editing. Just because you can't shoot film like you shoot digital, doesn't mean you shouldn't try it, because that's basically the whole point, it's a completely different type of photography. You don't have to give up digital to shoot film either, you can very happily do both.

[@martin701]

Finley Cartmell: spot on!!

[@joeltunnah]

Well said. I never understand the “film or digital” debate. My answer is both.

[@OwenRalph]

To be fair, I think James is saying much the same as you - they're different experiences and there are great reasons to do both. The experience of film just doesn't appeal as a personal preference.

[@AntonKnall]

Exactly this. I use digital for parties and events, because I can get loads of shots and I don't have the time to think about composition. But otherwise? I usually only shoot film, I love finding the right composition and experimenting without having to decide later which one is the best and I honestly think that it made me a better photographer.

[@martin701]

@@AntonKnall completely agree

[@MyAvalonPhotography]

I shot medium format film for years and scanned the negatives. I agree with all your reasons plus digital has better dynamic range. I will never go back to film.

[@paultaylorphotography9499]

I was brought up on film processed and printed my own mono stuff bought my first dig in 03 loved and still love it I use it all day every day in my job as a newspaper photographer it’s essential I never got rid of my film gear though and over last year or two I’ve gone back to film more and more for personal projects for me it’s a complete chill out after the urgency of my day job I love the feel and sound of a mechanical film camera I still process my own film but don’t have the space at this time for printing that being said once retired I aim to kit out a darkroom. It’s all down to enjoyment I enjoy both mediums equally for different reasons. There’s no right or wrong imho. Great video James lovely location 📷❤️📷

[@maxtized5422]

I do both, digital and film. Really enjoy shooting film for the manual controls and on top I learned much about light and composition. Also, I started to develop film myself. The biggest drawback for me is the scanning/digitalization process. This is very tedious.

[@hauke3644]

Happily left film photography behind many years ago, not looking back… But looking at thousands of slides and negatives not yet scanned to be made usable again.

[@IzzyLeicanut]

I started out in film 30 years ago and now shoot both in Full Frame and Medium Format. Both formats are the means to an end. The best part is the journey.

[@hughwolfe1176]

Along a similar vein “will I ever purchase a mirrorless camera?”… I purchased my D700 because I liked the size and it fits my hands… I didn’t purchase a Canon as I didn’t like the ergonomics (button placement) by comparison with Nikon… I tried a Fujifilm mirrorless briefly, it’s too small for my hands, just like the Nikon Z series. Someday camera manufacturers will realize their customer base didn’t shrink like they said in the movie… I do own a film camera, it belonged to my dad. Vintage 1953 Contaflex. I keep it for sentimental reasons… Yes James, I too shoot from here, and then there. And maybe once again in that other spot 😁 I enjoyed the trip with you, stay safe.

[@cuthalion4281]

As a fairly young man (in college) who has been shooting casually since high school on my dad's 15-year-old Nikon D50, I spent a few years just fiddling around with settings and hoping things came out right. This year, I got a film camera to force myself to really learn how the settings interact and judge exposures. After just 2 rolls, I think it's done wonders to help me understand what needs to be done. Now when I shoot digital, I can get the pictures I want more easily. In the future, I think I'd like to continue using both, because I find the challenge greatly rewarding and I like the look of film. There are pros and cons to either, and I enjoy both for different reasons. And after researching DSLR's for upgrading (the D50 is a potato by today's standards), I can definitely say film has a much lower bar to entry, but the recurring costs can raise the price quickly. You can get a decent film camera for under $100 (I found a Minolta X-370 and an extra 80-200mm lens at a thrift store for $10 each), but I found that rolls of film cost at least $5 each and development/scanning (via sending to a lab) usually costs upwards of $10 a roll.

[@lensman5762]

Shooting film is a different philosophy and discipline to the digital world of instant gratification and shoot 100 frame maybe one fits the bill. It is not for everyone, in fact it is only for the few who are dedicated to the process. I do shoot digital as well as film ( for the past 45 years ), and the digital results are good, but different to film. And if I may say so and with all due respect to everyone, very few people raised in the digital era have the technical knowledge to make good use of film. Many do not even have the basic knowledge of the relationship between the quantity of light, the quality of light, the response curve of the film and its relationship to the desired exposure value, let alone the effect of different developers and developing techniques in the case of BW film. With film every exposure counts or otherwise it will cost you a lot of money and time. I admire your honesty in declaring your disinterest in analogue photography, as opposed to a lot of others who have just jumped on the bandwagon of film photography as a badge of honour and, me too I know what I am doing.

[@SamFilms]

I'm the same type of shooter as you but I enjoy film for photos on the go or photos I don't mind being optimal. It also give a classic look to modern things and kind of trick your mind to search for vintage or retro looking stuff to shoot.

[@annie291180]

Amazing scenery, now I want to go to Wales... By the way I also am using the G9 and I absolutely love it!

[@iiwii8622]

When I started with photography, film was the mass media, it's what everyone shot in the 80s and most of the 90s, so it's stayed with me as a format to this day. That being said, however, it would be financial suicide to shoot film in my genre (conflict/war photojournalism), because every other photographer would have his or her images on the desks of editors before my rolls of film were even in a patterson tank. Digital for work, and film for occasional personal projects for me. I agree with you completely, although I do shoot film still.

[@stevenj2380]

I have a dslr bought used approx. 2 yrs ago, which I could never afford back in the day when it was new. I used a rangefinder Minolta basic cam from 1973 into the 90s. Took lots of college and friends pics years ago. Good pics, I enjoyed using it outdoor and indoors with tiny 'strobe'. Now it's Nikon FX and DX. Keeper rate is lower than with old Minolta Hi Matic! The Nikon F100 is akin to their DSLRs in many ways. But not serving a practical purpose; I don't want to make room for the non-digital media! So I've only shot a few rolls. Pristine body, perhaps will hold some value for resale in the future.

[@ellyelzinga01]

That image at 9:34 is just stunning!! I understand how you feel about film, I would have the same issue with it. I also like to maybe take 10 (or more) almost the same pictures with just minor changes to them, and also storage would concern me.

[@tmeeten3195]

Loved the Pony bonus - just beautiful in a stunning scene

[@falithon]

We realised recently that we can easily go up to Ogwen after work for a walk - what a treat to have it so close! All the best on the baby front mate.

[@ChristineWilsonPhotography]

Love those shots you got with the river in the foreground

[@wendynewing8834]

After many years of shooting film I moved over to digital in 2004 and there is no way I would return to film. Too much can go wrong. Also, the pain of having magazines returning your precious transparencies covered in scratches, or finger prints, or even losing them completely, is always there. Anyway, the cost is prohibitive when compared with digital. Technology has moved on. Sadly digital has meant that photography is not appreciated in the way that it was and is not rewarded financially. Gone are the days when you could enjoy a good living from providing images to photo libraries or even getting sent to exotic locations on commission.

[@Adrian-wd4rn]

cost? Good digital camera worth its salt = 2-3k. Good lens worth its salt, 600-2k. My bronica? 360 bucks. I have years worth of film to burn before I even get close to touching the cost of a digital body, decades if you factor body and lens, and batteries and memory cards., which still can't match the resolution.

[@christheking1]

I haven’t shot film in a while but I’m thinking about giving it a shot just for the “surprise” factor when you develop the film and find out if it’s a keeper or trash lol. Ps. I found your photos pretty good on this video actually. PS2: now my kid wants a pony!!! Nice job James!!!!!

[@SeeSawMassacre]

I pretty much only shoot film now, and that's one of the main reasons why. I like the unpredictable qualities of film- it seems to have a certain magic to it and i can never fully imagine what it's going to look like until i develop the roll. It also has a realness to it that i don't get from digital, and it seems to capture feeling more accurately to me. And digital is just too easy. Convenience can devalue things make them less special.

[@christheking1]

@@SeeSawMassacre I agree. I think shooting film I will probably slow down and take my time as I evaluate all the aspect of my photography since it’s almost a one time deal for each shot. Maybe it’s what I need to take the next step. I already dusted off my old Olympus OM-10 between these two comments.

[@SeeSawMassacre]

@@christheking1 Nice. Yeah, i just ask myself, "does this shot have a chance of being a good picture" before i take it. If the answer is maybe or better, i go ahead. I like the pace of shooting film; i find it relaxing. It definitely slowed me down and made me learn a lot. And i just think it's cool, so it keeps me interested and open to taking good pictures.

[@Hangiinjohnny]

Film is a fun exercise with zero instant feedback but the evf is just too good

[@joshuagow3150]

I just got back from a weekend hiking around Snowdonia. It's such a fantastic place to photograph. Making landscape videos in the rain isn't much fun though!

[@2DogAle]

I went from large format film photography to digital for them purpose of weight and actually, cost. Film can be expensive depending on what format you shoot. I do miss the tactile feel of my field camera, loading the film and composing the shots, but I don’t miss dragging it around with giant tripod and all the holders. Some day, I will return to it, but I am enjoying the same kind of freedoms that you described in this video. Good luck with your new baby when it come James.

[@davidsirr9910]

I came back to this subject. Film, your point is right on. I do both. Medium format film, outstanding images. Digital 4/3’s compact easier to use. Long ago motor drive was invented for 35mm film cameras allowed the photographer to shoot a roll of Kodachrome in 30 seconds. Same as digital? Not quite. Back then film was cheap, processing was inexpensive (mostly). Digital? 2 megapixels?

[@authenticarkansas]

I drove 1200 miles to shoot a video…. And got home to find my audio completely failed. I feel this.

[@danielemicheligigotti7087]

Would be nice to hear at least one person talking about the fact that film photography pollutes, a lot!

[@davebrown3117]

I can't say that I missed shooting film. I started shooting film back in the 1970s when I was a kid and continued into the 1980s as an adult from there. My last old film camera was an old Canon manual 35mm film camera. It had a very basic "light metering system" that helped you set up the shot, kind of. It was not a TTL metering system, it was external and gave an indication as to the aperture and shutter speed and how they interacted. I learnt a lot. I also learnt that while I can shoot in manual mode competently on my DSLRs, I'd rather shoot in a semi-auto mode most of the time. I usually shoot in aperture mode when bush walking with a zoom lens for bird/animal shots. Yeah, sure, I can and do shoot in manual mode for long exposure shots through an ND filter/or not. But that takes practice for shots longer than 30 seconds. Night or day.

[@luis_soares_photography]

"2 more weeks to be fully cooked" ? Is that how you talk about your baby? 😂😂😂 I wish you both the best, and that it all goes well with the baby. Nice video, by the way. Cheers!

[@VlogPhotography]

I capture far too many images to be shooting in film but the real reason is probably I dont have the patience to be waiting for the results. I would end up spend a fortune on film and images. I much prefer digital for the same reason James. I love a good edit and having the ease of having it straight from the camera to SD card.

[@ALFarrell-kv6ok]

I would love to still shoot film. The old SLR cameras were gorgeous. But I feel like a photocopier/Xerox operator with digital cameras. We unfortunately cannot easily develop film anymore.

[@jamesmlodynia8757]

I used a film camera for so many years, much more than my 16 years with digital photography, I found using film to be restrictive, I used film up to 1600 and the grain was terrible, even with my older camera bodies ISO 1600 gave me much better results. Using a digital camera is freeing, I can adjust my ISO to shoot in different lighting and subjects without having to change out a roll of film, post processing of digital files allows more creativity and the ability to make my own prints on a variety of different papers, also having the ability to print on a wide range of print sizes, and custom sizes is a big plus. The years that I photographed events in today's digital world would not have been possible with a film camera, people expect digital files that they can share on a variety of social media platforms and that can be delivered faster than photos from a film camera. From the time I photographed a wedding to the time I shipped a wedding package to my clients took two weeks. That was processing all the digital files transferred to a flash drive and a packet of prints, shipped priority mail. I did all the work my self so I didn't book weddings more than two weeks, family photos or other projects about a week apart, I could finish small projects in less than one weeks time. So after using film and digital for many years I prefer to use digital cameras, I get more involved in the process and I only print a select handful of prints.

[@DJPixelList]

Well, with regards to the number of images on a film versus digital; one could just load up a low capacity SD card..say 5gb or whatever size will give you, say 20 to 30 images on you particular camera. That will certainly limit the number of images one could take. If you normally take 2 rolls of film on a shoot, just take 2 low capacity SD cards. Same thing. Or, one could just revert to basics and think about one's digital image before pressing the shutter. I use a MF digital, and very, very seldom "shoot from the hip". Thought and composition and planning is key, as it always was. I usually take a maximum of 2 digital images per scene/scenario etc. Works for me. Nice video. Best wishes David in the UK.

[@minus1db]

I was there on Friday, well not quite as I couldn’t bloody park, luckily I’m only 25 minutes away but I love Ogwen Valley

[@brianmckeever5280]

I agree, film is not for me for very similar reasons. I guess the best description of how I shoot is serendipity and spray. If something, anything really, looks interesting it gets photographed at many compositions both vertical and horizontal. I also want to know I got a shot. Goes with my fears of missing out and failing quite nicely. As for cost, I went to New Zealand in 1993 with 36 rolls of 36 exposure slide film at 100, 200 and 400 speeds. With development, it cost me about $900 as I recall. Digital just feels greener to me too. Finally, I enjoy the process of finding images. Adding angst with unnecessary limitations wouldn't help me enjoy the experience I've grown to love.

[@John-Walker]

Basically all the same reasons I don’t shoot film, love the look of the vintage and film stuff but don’t like the limitations. So love to shoot with vintage lenses on modern camera bodies gives the best of both worlds there

[@tallaganda83]

I grew up shooting it and had a bit of a phase when I was able to afford cameras I once dreamed of but after a lot of reflection it is such a wank. I have now dedicated myself to pushing the boundaries of digital.

[@acmdv]

It pains me when I see terrible (yes terrible) photos getting thousands of likes on social media, I cannot help but notice bad composition, out of focus (or missed focus), boring subject matter, horrible processing (vomit of colours comes to mind - not my own term but you get the idea). What these “vernacular” images do is drown out a lot of genuinely good images. I think digital photography has made people lazy, I’m not saying people are lazy I just think it has made it easy for people to take lots of photos without thinking about what they are photographing and how/why they are photographing it which in turn makes the whole process less thought through. With film photography you have to really think about what you are taking a photo of; the whole process takes longer which I think is a good thing. With film photography you are far more invested in the image making process from start to finish which can really help develop your photography especially when it comes to composition. You can buy an SLR for £10 and that’s one with a built-in light-metre, auto film advance, autofocus (Canon EF mount). If you already own a Canon or Nikon DSLR or glass for either, then they will work on most automatic SLR cameras so you would not need to buy additional lenses. Black & white film is generally the cheapest to buy & develop (either in a lab or if you are up for it at home as well) and has more latitude than colour film, plus it is way cooler! I recently picked up a fully working manual SLR with a built-in light metre for £30 and that included a 50mm F1.7 lens, I bought an additional lens for £11 (including delivery) - all fully functional and in very good condition. The savings you can make with medium format film photography in relation to the digital equivalent is even bigger. I guess it all depends on how far a person wants to take their photography. Casual, hobbyist, serious amateur, artist/professional?

[@YoetoenYoe]

Go through the photos shot on film on social media and you find that so mayn of them are the same pedestrian crap over and over again. Overexposed to the extreme, pastel colors, no shadows and highlights blown out. All shot somewhere in a suburb. I do not think it really is a matter of medium, but the fact that everyone with a camera fancies themselves a photographer now and posts their shots. Without first learning anything about photography.

[@acmdv]

@@YoetoenYoe But would they be doing that if they didn't have a digital camera? It's the "Instant gratification culture" that digital photography (mobile phones in particular) has brought about this situation.

[@YoetoenYoe]

@@acmdv I don't think it's the digital cameras, it's social media. lookup any anolog related hashtag on Instagram for isnatnce an you will see no shortage of mediocre to bad photos that all have thousands of likes and comments from people who fee superior cause they use film.

[@clemfandango9534]

Biggest difference with film is INTENT. And fear. The concentration needed to make sure you get the exposure right and the way you have to truly learn about light simply makes you a better photographer. The fear that it will not come out as you planned keeps you sharp. wouldphotographer

[@joe2snj]

I hear that from a quite a few film photographers but its simply not true. What makes anyone better at anything is doing said activity over and over again on a regular basis and having the freedom to experiment, make mistakes with immediate feedback. My photography has improved because I shoot digital and have the flexibility of taking different versions of the same frame and each of those frames can and often do teach me something. I still pay attention to light as all good photographers do no matter the medium they shoot in. Maybe you channel your fear to get the best out of your photography but I and many others don't, film or digital shooters.

[@Tainted-Soul]

That last photo with the ponies looks great I would be well happy with it . As for Film ............ I look at it like Antiques stick em in a museum to show how we got to where we got and forget them.. I remember my Minolta 35mm I thought it was great take 36 photos wait 2 days to find out that nothing turned out like you thought it would .. but is was a good turning curve. I like the live display EVA with the histogram and all and no more waiting to find out they aren't any good I can see that straight away LOL

[@JohnKrill]

I really enjoyed the sound of the streams you encountered. Including the falls.

[@RememberTheTrees]

I am just the same about losing stuff. But I do journal. Also, I was just talking to a friend who ran a studio back in the day with a Mamiya RB67; those images look so good.

[@mariemellow]

Well, I shoot film and digital. It's just a hobby for me and I enjoy both forms of photography. 😊 The reason why I Shoot digital is because I like to edit my photos in Lightroom or Photoshop. But sometimes I also enjoy just shoot film en see what the results with a specific film roll and camera will give me. 😊

[@imabigsandwich1292]

Regarding the points about manipulating film scans, try scanning using your lumix s5, you don't even need an expensive lens, something like the canon 50mm f3.5 is good enough if you stop down to f5.6 or f8, and you get all of the benefits of a digital raw files when manipulating in post, with insane dynamic range compared to the lab scanners, not to mention the high res mode allowing for 96mp raw scans!

[@andrewgallup3890]

At least for myself who "grew up" with film photography your initial explanation of NO would have been sufficient.

[@joeltunnah]

I’m not following you. I grew up with film, and yet have come back to it twice since the 2010’s.

[@andrewgallup3890]

@@joeltunnah I guess that is why we have horseraces, differences of opinion.

[@broken12367]

Love it James on a Saturday

[@JLTPhotog]

I agree about the editing. I really enjoy it. Just as I enjoyed the darkroom from years past, but I do very much love the digital world. Also James, I agree about handwritten notes AND redundancy.... so I take hand written notes on MS Onenote via a stylus and tablet. Try it out!. 👍

[@paultidsy4019]

I have an old Canon T70 in the cupboard that would be fun to dust off, but honestly I can do without the cost of film and developing. And I remember the old days of shooting off a roll, being all excited to pick up the developed photos, only to pull a sad face when I see that most of the photos were rubbish. With digital I'm getting all my rubbish shots for free, which is nice. Also, lovely cameo from the ponies!

[@jimpchip]

I would not have gotten back into photography if film were the only option. I need the instant gratification and the ability to spray and spray.

[@DevI-vl7gp]

I learned to shoot on film, because I was too poor to go digital. I miss how easy film was compared to digital, which is weird to say. Like, the little light meter told me my shot was perfectly exposed, but now there's 50 things all over my viewfinder. Histograms, memory, exposure stops, shutter speed, ISO, aperature, battery, autofocus, ratio, etc. Just give me back my little bouncing circle so I can just twist a dial and get it into place. I actually bought an XT-3 just to have my dials back, because I cannot be arsed to go into menus. Hell, I even bought lens adaptors from FD to XF because I'd rather pick up a $10 lens at goodwill than shell out $3,000 for something that gives me OIS and autofocus, which I don't even use. If there are HUD mods for digital cams, I'd love to hear about them.

[@stevenwalker4690]

It also matters what you are doing with the end result. I have had several "my life changed" moments with technology. I learnt my photography in the dark rooms at the Plymouth School of Art. I struggled a long time to discover something I felt able to do. I didn't think I was much good as a "high art" illustrator or photographer. But in the end I became a Technical Author. And it was so much easier to go up to the machine and grab a digital picture. The image was fine in a PDF and it did the job. If I had done it with film; I would have had to wait two or three days to find out if I had the shot, and then there would have been a lot of faff to get it into the document. All I remember of school was being told I was no good at stuff; like maths and oddly enough English too. It was miserable. Then one day I discovered Adobe Illustrator and a digital camera . . and I wished I had this stuff when I was at school. I wished I had been able to get on with my life then, and not when I was already over 40 years old. The digital camera has unleashed my life after years of being told to sit at the back of the class and not get in the way of the smart kids. To have a camera is to have a voice. To have a digital one is to be able to hold a conversation in real time.

[@hajime5486]

I can't trade the Sony ecosystem. My a7Riv for photos, my a7Siii for video, my Xperia Pro for streaming footage. People can say film looks great but I have no love for analog work

[@alfepalfe]

I do both, digital in color and black and white film, this is because I can develop B&W myself easily. I do them differently, I think film is more fun and rewarding (especially when you do developing and darkroom printing yourself.) But with digital I like the fact I don't have to feed the camera rolls of film which are not free.

[@PaulHarveyAustralia]

you're always entertaining and not least, inpirational!

[@iangordicans8763]

Interesting vid. I shoot both with a Mamiya 7ii 6x7 film camera and a Sony full frame mirrorless. I find it almost impossible to use both at the same time, they are such different disciplines and propositions so if going out for the day tend to pack one or the other. As time goes by I tend to use the Sony more than the Mamiya. As James mentions the post processing of digital gives you a huge amount of flexibility plus access to such a wide variety of different lenses. But the Mamiya is so much fun to just wander around with and the Mamiya lenses are beautiful, plus it gives me the excuse to get out the developing tank out and process my own big fat medium format B&W negs which is always a thrill. Amazingly the Mamiya has nearly tripled in value since I bought it 7 or 8 years ago but I'm not sure that I'd ever be tempted to part with it.

[@scrptwic]

James My problems with film photography I bought a Pentax Spotamatic with a number of lenses and filters all m42 screw mount. I loaded the Spotamatic with film and did not get the film in the take up spool properly no pictures. With film you never know what you get tell you develop it. I use a hand held Minolta Light meter as the Spotamatic light meter does not work . Problems with film cameras Can't change ASA ( ISO) stuck with film speed Never know what get until developed Have to set apature ring and focus manually no autofocus slows down photography Each picture costs either in film stock or development and limited by 36 picture roll of film I used to carry two camera bodies one with ASA 200 film for daylight and one with ASA 1500 film for low light or night photography. One digital camera can do it all with more flexibility.

[@uncatila]

You can use a tg6 which marks each shot with gps.itsvwaterproof also. Tg5 has the same sensor as the tg6 and it is a grate EDC camera as well.

[@thewholeninemedia]

Those pony shots were absolutely whimsical

[@joetagg1961]

I’ve thought about getting back into film. But not for very long. It just doesn’t interest me anymore. I still have unexposed film in my freezer that’s been there for probably 20 years. That includes almost a whole box of 4X5 Fuji Provia 100. I just think digital is more fun for me !! And cheaper ??

[@Lucentlens]

Given the recent discontinuation - that stuff will definitely be going up in value!

[@david1g1long]

They're two different hobbies that are moving even further away from each other. Of course you can do both, you can't just have 1 hobby now can you!

[@Babenberger]

I absolutely love my 4x5 negatives

[@RyanGreen]

The editing capability is the big one for me! Another great video man

[@andylawn9521]

..."look ponys"!! Ha! LOL So funny, thought you were tactically deviating. Then stunning pony's show up. They look truly majestic in the mountain setting. Big step up from sheep too.

[@c.augustin]

I see your point about film vs. digital. I think any photographer should have at least some experience with film to have a better understanding of both. After that, it's just a matter of preference and what you want to achieve with your photography (some images can be done only with film, others only with digital; and no, emulating certain aspects of film, say done on 4x5, is not the same). Myself, I'm "oscillating" between both (with a bias towards film).

[@jamesmlodynia8757]

One other reason why I don't use film, while I can limit the amount of shots photographing landscapes, I enjoy photographing wildlife and birds and on a trip that I have planned to the Eastern Shores of Virginia in September for a few days I will take more than a thousand photos between birds, wild horses 🐎 and seascapes on this trip, it would take a fortune in film and not very practical, photographing birds requires shots of 10 frames a second or more to capture a few good birds in flight photos, can't really do it with a film camera, then processing film is a longer process that requires equipment that I don't have and the space for it..I usually use ISO 800 or higher for wildlife and birds and film that would give me the speed I need would be too grainy. So other than using it for landscape photography is not practical, to get the felling of film I use a Fujifilm XT3, XT5 or Nikon ZF , I have a wide variety of glass some are manual focusing Voightlander prime lens.

[@marckriggins2171]

Loved the ponies rambling through the landscape!

[@neilford5262]

Shot film for 20 years. Had zero interest in the darkroom process (paid to get films dev'd and scanned as soon as that became a thing), so switched to digital when Nikon released the D100, haven’t looked backed. Zero interest in going back. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt (though it no longer fits 😀).

[@karlamccormick2194]

The ponies definitely were icing on the cake. They made it. You got your allotted photos. 👍 Loved the rest of your video, too, though.

[@millwallfan111]

Mainly shoot film but I still use digital in my workflow depending on the situation!

[@Pmike404]

This is why I like the Leica M8 and M9 They have TTL metering No live view Terrible lcd screens Both cameras are like a weird in between of an analogue camera and a digital camera. If I had a film camera M mount camera I’d use the heck out of it because I love the Leica and Voigtlander glass, but I’m content with the M8 for now