Why Everyone Loves Film Photography?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 42

  • @MichaelWellman1955
    @MichaelWellman1955 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    THANK YOU! As LF/ULF user I love to hear some truth about film, especially for LF/ULF. One of the reasons I continue to use these formats is because I can compose for the actual size of the print. I do only contact printing and so I making the print I saw in the field.

  • @danielseurer1020
    @danielseurer1020 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    I guess I am a 68 year old hipster. Loving film shot in antique cameras and pin hole. I too had jean shorts that were in fashion back in the early 70s. Guess you could call me vintage hipster.

  • @gregmarcus3064
    @gregmarcus3064 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I shoot both but shooting film just gives you that feeling of "this is important", "this is serious", "I'm creating something that I hope looks special". Though after spending all that time and money and getting maybe one banger and not much else and feeling disappointed. I would load up again and go out there. Maybe its more about feeling the good in yourself when you indulge in this serious hobby.

  • @josephawatson
    @josephawatson 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I started back in film because I missed it, I'm now in my mid forties and have shot on film since I was a kid. Before digital I had collected quite a few cameras. I've also been able to add a few during the time when the prices bottomed out. A few I wished I had gotten during that time. I use fomarts from 35mm all the way up to 4x5. I do process film and someday I'd like to be able to have a full darkroom.

  • @wearetrackclub
    @wearetrackclub 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Interesting points! Film definitely has it's own charm 👏

    • @HiddenLight
      @HiddenLight  7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It does!

  • @TomNorthenscold
    @TomNorthenscold 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    I’ve observed that film renders light and shadows differently than digital. I assume this is due to the uniquely analog science behind film. This difference shows up in all formats, even 135. It’s not just about resolution. I love the way film renders an image. That’s why I shoot film.

  • @CianMcsweeney
    @CianMcsweeney 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    For me, I shoot both digital and film, the attraction of film for me ia partly the look/experience, but also the fact that my film camera (Leica M4), is many decades older than my digital camera, but will probably outlive it with correct care and maintenance (not true of every film camera, those that use electronics are just as likely to break).

  • @hansformat
    @hansformat 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +14

    Shoot film on a well overhauled 35mm mechanical cameras if you enjoy things that are well made. Things that do not need to be replaced on a regular basis. Things that do not need recharging and extra batteries. Things that do not need firmware upgrades to work properly. Put all the nonsense behind you and enjoy photography.

  • @nekyo_R
    @nekyo_R 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I love film photography because it limits me! I can't just take a few shots and that forces me to look for the best of the best photos. Also those colors omfg

  • @anta40
    @anta40 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    For me, film is the most affordable way to join the medium format club. But the price of used gears like Fuji GFX 50S or Hasselblad X1D are getting more affordable. I still shoot film for fun, but considering digital is more practical, perhaps one day I'm done with film.*
    * unless I join the 4x5 club, too :D

  • @robertwaffel8248
    @robertwaffel8248 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I shoot mostly medium format (645 and 6x6), but it is fun to also shoot every once in a while 35mm. resolution is not important in general if you get the frame correct in camera. In digital terms this would translate into ~10 MP and above is enough. That is why I still use my Nikon D700 (12 MP) when going digital. And 35mm is in that ballpark regarding resolution. So it all comes down to esthetics and what motivates you to pick up a camera in the first place Whatever it is: GO OUT AND TAKE PICTURES.

  • @michaelappleyard6300
    @michaelappleyard6300 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Choose film over digital, when time, cost and risk-of-failure allow it, simply because the pictures can look more pleasing and more evocative whereas digital is too often perfect; too matter-of-fact. However, if image resolution is important, bare in mind that 35mm colour negatives are equivalent in resolution to around 4 Megapixels which means that the grain and other sharpness limitations of the emulsion will start to be apparent with prints or on-screen displays larger than A4 size. 6 x 4.5 cm raises the resolution to around 11 Mp and 6 x 7 raises it to around 17 Mp. Meanwhile, 6 x 9 cm takes it to around 22 Mp which puts one into modern professional digital territory and enables prints of up to A2+ size to be viewed without visible grain. When using a camera like the Fujica GL690 rangefinder, with its excellent lenses, the quality really shows. And as for cool looks, nothing quite beats this so-called "Texas Leica", if you can find one in smart condition. But be prepared to pay $3 per negative!

  • @GordonMoat
    @GordonMoat 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Beard, messy hair, skinny jeans, fixed gear bike, several film cameras … OMG! I’m a hipster … Anyway, shoot mostly digital for work, unless it’s a special project, or long deadline. To me, film is a creative choice, meaning certain lenses and film combinations, like choosing tubes of paint and brushes for an oil painting.

  • @paullanoue5228
    @paullanoue5228 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Shot film for 35 years. Worked in photo lab that catered to professionals in the late seventies and early eighties. Switched to digital in 2004. I can do thousands of things to any image today in a well lit room. Thanks to the software. Things I could never do using photochemistry. I have full control of everything. If you shoot film to get a look similar to the master printers of the twentieth century you have to process the film yourself and dodge and burn your heart. Have fun guys, but I’ve been there done that. If you want to get excited about film go to a good museum and look at prints made by Paul Strand, Edward Steichen, Ansel Adams, Man Ray, Cecil Beaton. Don’t look on line. You must see the actual prints to truly understand what the medium is capable of producing.

    • @szecek
      @szecek 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I do sit at work in front of computer for the whole day so I enjoy shooting film much more than with my mirrorless camera. I really don't need to prove my point to anyone. At the end of the day what matters is if you enjoy the process and the picture itself.

  • @Saibal82
    @Saibal82 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I am following you for Pd printing, as I print Palladium & Silver print myself. I use Hasselblad, M6 and Mamiya 7II . I know the XPan result and the frame it provides. I want ask you couple of things soon.

    • @HiddenLight
      @HiddenLight  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Feel free to ask questions! It's the reason of this channel

  • @ChuckAbles
    @ChuckAbles 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great presentation.

  • @aaronalbores3999
    @aaronalbores3999 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Is digital photography better than 35mm film? Why? because you get more detail or resolution? Is that better? Is that what matters about photography? Is digital even cheaper than film? And more importantly, does it make you feel better? Does it help you learn more about photography than film? To all those questions I say no.
    And don't get me wrong, i don't think digital is bad. But with digital you don't get the delayed gratification, the gorgeous grain, tones and contrast, and you may have the ability to take 2000 pictures in an hour, but doing that you're not giving value to your photos, and that's what is all about, giving the value that photography deserves

    • @rebours
      @rebours 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The delayed gratification objectively gets in the way of artistic progress, the only two benefits of film are the organic rendering of textures and colors, and the increased attention/concentration related to the cost...

    • @aaronalbores3999
      @aaronalbores3999 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@rebours Yeah, that is true from a purely objective and scientific perspective, but we humans are subjective and emotional. For me, the important thing is what I feel when I take pictures and watch them later. What I feel when shooting film is different (and better) than when I shoot digital

  • @DannerPlace
    @DannerPlace 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The joy of film culminates under darkroom red lights, when the image first appears on the print during developments. That, my friend, is photographic Nirvana.

    • @HiddenLight
      @HiddenLight  7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Hahah! Couldn't agree more

  • @StudentBoots
    @StudentBoots 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I've got some cut off Jean shorts being held together with a generous amount of red tuck tape and they're the absolute best (everyone I know hates them)

  • @asamcqueen3513
    @asamcqueen3513 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Digital fakery only goes so far, though a lot of the "film look" is less about the film, and more about vintage lens designs. Putting an ancient lens on a modern digital camera will get you closer than popping in a roll of portra will. I'll admit, I'm a fan, to the extent of picking up the M6 reissue. Cameras like the M6 have another advantage though, on a camping trip they're mechanical, no batteries to recharge (button cell powered light meter not-withstanding). Though you will need extra rolls of film, and that might cancel out with trying to buy/carry extra batteries. That and you can shoot IR without modding a digital camera, just pop in a roll of Retro 80 or SFX 200.

  • @DavidImel
    @DavidImel 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    6x24 for life

  • @GwendalAria
    @GwendalAria 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I'm less distracted with film photography. All I focus on is the image in front of me. I'm always in the moment when I take pictures on film.

    • @HiddenLight
      @HiddenLight  7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Definitely a different experience

  • @ivanmuniz9812
    @ivanmuniz9812 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    The most important question:
    What’s in the (Nikon) BOOOXXXX???

    • @HiddenLight
      @HiddenLight  7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      What 'was' in the Nikon box ;)

  • @BadFlashes
    @BadFlashes 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩😘

  • @cameraprepper7938
    @cameraprepper7938 2 วันที่ผ่านมา

    "Everyone" does NOT love film photography ! I did photography with film for decades, I always felt bad about because of all the chemicals, so since 2007 I have only done digital photography, I love digital photoghy much more than I ever did with film !!!

  • @HoLeeChit11
    @HoLeeChit11 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I shot film back in the 80s up to about 4 years ago. Film was as cheap as chips back in the day, but now, it’s too stupidly expensive. It’s day light robbery. With the trend of ever rising cost of living, it’ll be out of reach for most people.
    Film will soon be rare, deader than a dead thing from dead land.

    • @szecek
      @szecek 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Check the prices of new full frame cameras and then count how much film you could shoot with the money. Especially, if you shoot B&W and develop at home. Anyway most people use smartphones now so if something is going to die it will be the whole camera market all together.

    • @HoLeeChit11
      @HoLeeChit11 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@szecek
      (1) you can buy certain FF cameras for about $1500-1800.
      (2) smart phones have been around for 10 years and cameras are now selling more than ever before.
      Not everyone wants to shoot B/W film, and 95% of people will not develop their own film.
      (3) on average one roll of 36 exposure costs just over $10/12 + $2/3 postage. So you are looking at about $12/15 per roll of film. Then developing is another $12/15 with postage, and not forgetting another say 🤔 $10 for digitisation of your analogue images. (because not everyone has or will buy a flat bed scanner). So doing the math, one roll of 36 exposure colour film will cost about $34/40. Again doing the math, one press of the shutter button will then cost you about $0.95/1.11, let’s call that an average of $1.05. Let’s say the average price of a mirrorless camera is about $2000 (although many are much less), then that means you can shoot 1905 frames of film at a cost of $2000.
      TELL ME FILM IS NOT DEAD.

  • @markhaney2884
    @markhaney2884 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    66 yr old hipster here, been shooting , processing and printing film since I was 14!!!! I was hipster before the word was invented. Real authentic hipsters also have a wet darkroom, just sayin.........

  • @eurekamedia.
    @eurekamedia. 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    TH-cam algorithms bring me here, look like they supporting small channel now.

    • @HiddenLight
      @HiddenLight  7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you and welcome then!

  • @nigeldawson5960
    @nigeldawson5960 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Do what you like. If you like film, good. If you don’t, so what. All this whining is a symptom of “give me attention” pandering on TH-cam and the rest of social media. See ya for something useful some day. Cheers!