วีดีโอ

Why film photography? Because its fun! Even though I love to hate on film in my youtube shorts. Regardless, Subbed!

For me I realized i just don't print digital photos, and I wanted more photos printed. I love walking into my folks home with the photos of aunts and uncles and meanwhile I only had one physical photo of my fiancée, despite her being the most important person in my life. So I got a Polaroid and now I have a ton of family photos on my work desk at the office and my hobby desk at home. Best decision I ever made

Nice video

Very nice video

There are a couple of reasons why I do film photography. I stumbled my way into it coming from a Canon APS-C DSLR. For starters I got an Exa 1b with a waist level viewfinder and a 50mm f/2.8 lens for 10€ a couple of years ago as my first film camera. It was just sitting on a shelf in a store's window at a local photo studio. I was just getting some chinese takeout, saw it sitting there and came back for it the next day. The name plate fell off, parts of the film counter are missing but it had the leather and red velvet case/bag(?) so it would have still looked nice as decor if it didn't work. I bought it for the sole purpose of trying out a waist level viewfinder because I had watched a couple of videos about the Hasselblad 500 series of cameras. Somehow the subjects looked so alive and three dimensional in the big medium format viewfinders. It worked and still does and the lens is actually quite good apart from being only f/2.8. I read up on the M42 lens mount, found out about the Helios 58mm lens and found someone who was selling it along with a Zenit E camera near me for marginally more than the lens alone typically goes for. It's heavy since it's mostly made of brass I think, the shutter makes a satisfying noise and it has a selenium light meter which I had never seen before. Unfortunately it won't get any better because they kind of decay as time goes on and become less accurate. It was build in 1982 afterall. Now I have a newer model Zenit 12XP with an electronic light meter and easier to use control knobs, a Jupiter 9 85mm and SMC Takumar lenses (28 f/3.5, 35 f/2.0, 55mm f/1.8). I kinda navigated myself into M42 because they relatively cheap to get. My interchangable lens SLRs are all M42, East German or Soviet models, because they cheap. Oh well, each camera is a whole experience. I have a Lomo Lubitel 166B and Yashica Mat 124G as 6x6 medium format cameras, both TLRs but they function very differently. For example with the Lubitel you can easily screw up your shot when your fat finger blocks the shutter lever. You also have to advance the film seperately or you will have multiple exposures on one frame. Ask me how I know... The viewfinder is really crappy tbh. Hard to frame and focus. You really have to take your time with it. The Yashica feels much more solid, has a better viewfinder (I just ordered a Bright Screen to upgrade it), there is less to screw up but it's also noticably heavier. I don't mind dangling the Lubitel on a strap on my wrist while I walk around, the Yashica requires a bigger neckstrap for me. I haven't even talked about the pictures I get from them yet. There is still a learning curve up ahead for me as I have to figure out how to work with film a little more, especially the exposure but my most recent results look promising. At first I had them developed and scanned at labs (I tried out different ones) but I got some equipment to scan the negatives myself so I'll only get the films developed from now. I use Lightroom and Negative Lab Pro for now. Even though the pictures might now be the most interesting or great, I have much more of a connection to them. I walk around my neighbourhood, take shots and make notes of the subjects and exposure settings and when I get the scans on my computer I am right back in that moment. I bought a Canon EOS R as an upgrade from my 600D/T3i but I don't feel the urge to take it with me somehow. I totally have to get to know it more to be more comfortable with it but there is not that much drive in me. Yeah... It's a gut feeling mostly. I totally have gear aquisition syndrome with analog cameras. They come in so many styles and flavors and I want to try them all.

shit's screwed. even with a telescope its getting harder and harder to see things, ssp w/ LED street lapms, that are rather bright.

I like everything about this video. The topic, the video and photo material, the animations, the scripting, your narration, the documentary approach, the interviews. Ok, maybe not the esoteric sentiment of the "Kosmos knowing itself". :D But dang. Great video. I actually would love to see a breakdown of how you created those text animations! Did you use any assets or did you build them from scratch?

4:00 Because he put a G lens on a F3t. He can’t take photo normally

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on Film Photography. I'm 62 , spent most of my life using film then like many slowly switched to digital. I'm now using film again after long time and I really appreciate the fact that so many young people like you are now using film. I'm was curious to know what leads you guys to use film nowdays and your video has provided me with some interesting material.

A beautiful video. Thank you for sharing your feelings and the thought process. It's so incredibly sad how many people daily see more more light from their devices than from the world outside...

Digital to me is distance, I can go further and take more shots (especially on my bike), and I have no repercussions for messing up. But film is slowing it down, taking a break, and thinking about every shot and every roll and waiting to get it developed at the local photo shore down the road to see the results.

I like film a lot it’s just the pricing for everything film related is too much!!

Great job explaining the feeling. 👍👍

I am sick of hearing that "When we shoot digital, we take thousands of pictures, hoping for one good one." I shoot digital almost exactly the way I shoot film (which I still use). On several recent trips, I shot between one and two "rolls" on my Fujifilm digital per day. I love film, because it has a different look from digital, and there's no camera simpler than my Retina IIc or Nikon FM. No "menus" or settings to worry about. I love digital for its resolution and low noise (among many other qualities) but I hate the complexity of the cameras.

I picked up my first camera back in 1980. Today (yes I’m old) I still have and use the AE1 Program. I never really gave up film and never really fully embraced digital. I still prefer film and do my own processing. For a few years it was getting difficult to find supples but now it is easier but getting more expensive

I used to shoot film on a Nikon F2, now I shoot digital on a Leica MD262 which shoots like a film camera...!

Love, love film photography!!! ❤

Woah, just found your channel, love it bro, great job mate

I picked up film photography because I see it as something of an antidote to the ever growing difficulty in telling real from AI generated images. Not only is it real and tangible, it makes me feel more conscious about what I'm taking photos of and I really like that.

5:23 oh wow... I thought Quentin was either going to flip a table over or just burst into tears... or both LOL

Nonsense. People are just overwhelmed with the possibilities of digital photography. Also, they have no discipline to limit themselves when using digital cameras. It's only human.

Digital is easy and close to perfection. Film is inperfect and shooting a analog camera a craft, scanning too. I use both. Digital for publishing, analog for personal projects. thanks for your video

Christopher Nolan and Quentin Tarantino make their movies on film. Oppenheimer was schott on film. The walking Dead was schott on film. Real Imax is schott on film. Digital is not bio degradable. The landfills are filling up faster at breakneck speeds because what is out now is already obsolete. And Digital is toxic. Phones and computers have lead and cadmium in them. In my town printers and computers are listed under hazardous waste and cannot be thrown out with regular trash.

Well put! 👍

My film photos look better and more tasteful without editing than the ones from my digital camera. Especially the lighting in harsh daylight. I appreciate the dynamic range and not heing scared about losing highlights.

This is gonna sound like a stupid answer as to why, but here's my reason(s). First off, I'm not a photographer by any stretch of the imagination. For years, my photo solution was either my phone, or a Fujifilm mirrorless that I bought years ago. The digital camera works great, but I have a habit of taking a dozen pictures of a single scene, and it loses value when I sift through multiple slight variations of the same picture. Phone works well enough, but when I get a new phone, I rarely transfer the photos (same reason, too many pictures of the same thing, too daunting to go through and cherry pick the best photos). I back up the photos to my computer, only to never look at them again. Then there is the possibility that the camera/phone is lost, broken, or stolen, and I have had a couple scares where the memory card said it was corrupted. For me, the intrinsic cost of film makes me only take 1, or at most, 2 pictures of a single scene. I dont want to sound like a dork, but there is something special about having 50 physical pictures of 50 different things that you took on a trip, as opposed to 200 pictures of 50 different things that can only be viewed by a screen. I like the idea that someone 40 years from now can find a shoe-box of photos and see what life was like in the 2020s. Right now, go through your SD card and see how long it takes to get bored looking at the pictures you took from years ago (let's be honest, you already dont want to do that because it sounds boring). Alternatively, go and find one of your parents' photo albums and see if you can keep yourself from looking at every single picture. There is something captivating about seeing the past on a physical photograph. I know you can have your digital pictures turned into prints. But again, that means going through the dozens of photos just to pick out a handful of the best images and have them printed. Film- just pop the roll out and sent it off to get developed and printed. Simple as. That's enough rambling. If you like digital, I totally get it. It's objectively superior in almost every way. I dont expect a professional would ever go back to film. But for me, there is something charming about the imperfect pictures that capture the vibe of the moment in a (subjectively) better way. God, that made me sound like a f***ing hipster.

Good coverage of the subject here sir. Nice production quality too. Your 1-3 points are probably true for many. There’s others too. For me it’s the workflow is easier ironically. I can shoot a subject in the morning, develop and dry and digitise the results and get the results to client later that day with little to no colour correction etc needed. Or I can send it to a lab and have them do it all. Either way the results are back in a few days. It’s also just how I’ve always done it and I’m a Luddite who doesn’t like changing how I do things 😅

Shooting film when it was the only medium then suddenly thrust into the digital age was the most liberating experience. The vast majority of of film photographers today have no idea what a properly shot roll of film looks like. Then argue the fact that they say film is still superior is the biggest laugh. These so called looks of recent film are usually a result of expired or terribly over or under exposed film. Sure it's an aesthetic but is more anchored in faded prints found in a shoe box.

Film cameras allow the use of your brain to control everything, most especially the moment to take the shot. Do-everything-for-you digital cameras, while allowing fine images to be produced, cultivate opacity of the process, giving the control to the device.

All I miss from the film era is mechanical cameras...feel, sound, manual focus. I never liked waiting for the film to be developed, and on one occasion, find out that whole role of film is overexposed, because my aperture jammed wide open.

omg walter mitty love! i loved that film, and to my dismay found i was the only one i knew lol

I started shooting film at the beginning of the year and was instantly hooked. There is magic in having to wait to see your photos, and in some cases, forgetting what you even shot till you get them back. Pictures seem to have more meaning, and your forced to take your time composing the shot and making 100% sure its worth taking before you hit the shutter. I'd take 50 pictures of the same thing with digital and pick out the best one, and it just seemed like a waste. Your basically forced to get better since film and development is so expensive, you don't want to waste film.

Ah yes the nostalgia i feel when im shooting wit my 1976 Yashica fx 2 (im still under 20 years old)

nostalgia... for sure

The imperfect perfection or perfect imperfection which makes film photography special for me…

Walter Mitty is easily Ben Stillers best movie. It's a great movie and it's just gorgeous.

Digital has become too perfect and easy to use(weight aside in some cases). The z6ii delivers much more than I expect and need as a hobbyist knowing also that you can tweak easily in post any blunders. I am taking up film now because I want to slow down and savour the process as well as the result up to and including development ( printing I'll pass to others for now). You get more in the moment and then anticipate the results. Had too much fun shooting with a 20 yearold point & shoot this year to ignore film photography. Besides using adapted older lenses with focus peaking on mirroless is a joy. It's a win win situation.

What sadden me is that in all minds, digital will kill film no matter what because of the "tech" aspect and performance behind did. But I really don’t understand ; acrylic didn’t put a term on oil painting, we’re talking about art and expression, not frames per second ffs. Sometimes we need to shoot an Ilford 3200, sometimes a D850 and sometimes a Nokia 6300, let us live

The soul of photography is found in the darkroom.

Today their not even doing PHOTOGRAPHY. They are using technology to perform "Digital Image Capture"!!!!! HUGE DIFFERENCE! I recall when magazines like "Modern Photography" added "and digital imaging" to their titles. To possibly sell a few more copies. It was the big Advertising Agencies of New York City then eventually convinced the next generation of "dum-dums" that "Digital Imaging" was somehow "the same as" actual Photography. Guess what? IT ISN'T. I'm reminded of the incident in Japan, after a transportation accident, all the investigators (save one) were using Digital Image boxes, instead of Cameras 📷. Later, at the "Office" all 6 "investigators" found out that ALL their image data had been wiped clean! And the ONLY pictures they had to use in their whole accident investigation were two rolls of 35mm shot by the oldest man at the scene! So YES! There is a huge difference.

It was becoming more popular now it's becoming less popular because film and developing cost way too much money.

A big part of analog photography is to be all alone in a darkroom and watch your creations come to live. And the smell of cemicals...

Gotta make physical prints either way. I shoot film because I like film..

Embrace digital, but shoot it like your would with a film camera. That is my approach.

For me, I shoot film because it encompasses a beautiful contradiction. On the one hand, it helps remind me of what is real, in an increasingly unreal world. On the other hand, it slightly distances the image from reality. When the cynical precision of digital is replaced with rays of light dancing on physical film, it helps me see the moment that has passed through a lens of introspection and personal resonance, and suddenly every picture matters so much more.

simple reality...too bad Kodak no longer makes Kodachrome ASA 25.

I don’t think “film photographer” is a type of photographer. Film is a medium and it allows you to shoot any kind of photography you like.

Hearing your thoughts on why film photography is continuing to be important to many people was interesting. Thanks for this. When people call it “analogue”, do they give any thought to what film photography is analogous to? Analogue is not a word that stands on its own. It is a comparative term. Your drone work and videography is top-notch. Good luck, eh!

I now have eight film cameras. I just like shooting my film equipment. Yes, I have a digital... but the film gets out often. It's a split between B&W and color. When you get those really good shots it feels good. I shot a roll at a city park Dec 15. Maybe I'll get the pictures back by years end. That is part of the fun... the anticipation!

With your permission I will rename this post: "What's The Deal With (B&W) Film Photography"... Why??? Very simple is easier to take color pictures with digital cameras... But It is very difficult and satisfactory to take a roll or a plate of B&W film, going into the darkroom, using chemicals in the dark with the film, in very subdue light expose the paper go to chemicals again, wash, dry... Put the light on and find that the exposition, develop time and all the steps before has been right... Not every "light on" is a victory but is a teaching experience. Happy shooting!!!