A quick way to be humbled is to look at the best work that is being done with one's "old camera" and compare it to one's own. This mind game has saved me a lot of money. Good video.
Well said. I love film and shoot it because it's what I learned on and I enjoy it but the format doesn't matter at all. In my opinion over processing of images might be more off putting than the simple fact that someone used a digital camera. But even then it comes down to style and taste, not better or worse.
The best camera is the one in Stephen Milner's hand😀 Which is better 50mega pixel MF camera or the advance high mega pixel full frame cameras. No correct answerer to any of these questions just, "pick a camera, any camera," then just go create! Eagerly awaiting your book.
Great video. Thank you for posting. I agree with all that you share here. I enjoy and continue to shoot film because of its look - I choose a film for a given scenario and it is typically pleasing without manipulation, because I have greater confidence in the longevity of my slides and negatives versus the digital files, and because I like the process of making film images - including the insecurities/anticipation of nailing proper exposure and waiting for development that I am doing like my parents and my grandparents. I look forward to the future videos that you will post and I feel that you are putting your energies in very important and interesting directions. Cheers from Canada
Nice words, thank you. You raise some good points here about the insecurities and anticipation of film photography that I missed in this video. Film is such a good teacher for becoming comfortable with the imperfections of photography, especially film, and patience.
I shoot both - recently upgraded my X-T4 to the GFX100S (I’m in the Waikato too if you ever want try one of the lenses I have that you might not: 30mm, 35-70, 100-200 + 1.4x t/c and 80mm 1.7 👍). Film for me is more of an indulgence. Definitely leans more of the hobby side of things. The PressPan 35mm panoramic camera I have is challenging to shoot, but super rewarding!
Stephen I agree with you're comments, I shoot more film mainly B&W, but I also like to shoot digtal. Like other comments to appreciate film you need to learn the art of the three most important things on the camera, then learn how to read light & shadows. I did weddings back in the 80's and 90's all with film, its true you never stop learning with film. But as you say you are an artist so what you do and shoot you can't please everyone. I am on a website for B&W photography I post my images and love the feed back and along with criticism, its how you get a better photographer, If you dont like the feed back then dont post. Keep up the excellent work..
I started with 35mm film using the Minolta x500, then advanced into medium format with Mamiya 645 and RZ67 and finally to large format with a Horseman 4x5 field camera. It was a great experience, learnt much from trial and error but it was costly. After years of film I then moved to digital starting a Sony RX10, then to Canon 5Ds and now Fuji 50s II medium format. Did starting with film help, yes if you can afford the cost and time but I find digital allows me to be much more creative and experimental now and coupled with the advances in affordable printing up to A2 at home is much more fulfilling and satisfying for my creative expression.
Hi. I guess âge has some advantages…. I started photography as a kid in the 1940s with Ansco camera shooting 127 roll film then shot roll film 120 till 135 Kodachrome 25 a film probably in some ways better than Velvia 50 Long story short I shot architecture with an Arca Swiss 69 medium format view camera. That and the Pentax 67 are my fav film cameras. I shot Fuji film 100S now. Moving from architecture to landscape has shown me how limited my photo skills really were. My main reason for moving from Fuji X series and Olympus 43 digital was to get more wide angle from tilt shift lenses. I used a Cambo Actus for a while with the GFX 50S, very great camera body / tool but did not like having to set up the camera each time I used it. The point of this long monologue is simply to agree that cameras are just tools. One is not better than the other. Digital happens to be very efficient and cheaper than film. It also eliminates the scanning process. But shooting film without a built in light meter and no auto functions is a good way to improve one’s craft. Your work looks great. Check out tilt shift or just tilt lenses. Fun, powerful efficient for big panoramas
Hey, thanks for your interesting story. It sounds like you have a good setup. I would like a tilt lens. There is wide angle one on the Fujifilm GFX lens roadmap. Would love to try it out.
I personally think digital is better. The tech of cameras now a days means, that the "film look" or 'style' can be achieved with digital, and no one would know the difference. It's more about the process than the output in my opinion. If the intentionality and motivation is there i don't think it matters either way. But I'm no photographer. As a film maker any camera from the last few years is going to give you amazing images. But also a new camera can be inspiration or motivation in its self. I get excited about new lenses and cameras all the time.
That's the whole process, you need to be happy with your own Photos before you can make other happy, it's as you said not about gear but about feeling. Once I'm in the mood for Film another moment I'm in the mood to shoot Digital, with lenses the same, 24-105 zoom (new) and another moment I just take my vintage 50mm 1.4 and make stunning photos with that....or at least that's what I think! And there it all starts! Thanks good video.
Cool video Steven, and you're right. None of both types of medium are better than the other. Technically maybe a different story, but it is a very personal choice. Film suits me better because it forces me to slow down, and I spend less time with my face behind the glass and more out there. And I enjoy the process and aesthetic just too much for me to even bother thinking switching to digital. And it's just that - a recording tool, it's about how you use it. Still shooting and enjoying my Mamiya 645 Super and Hasselblad 500c, and to me that's a lot about the crop ratio as well as how the camera feels and operates. I also stick almost exclusively with black and white film, also because of the simplicity and aesthetics. Even got a v850 scanner to replace my v600 - the quality and operation are far superior and do let me enjoy my negatives even more. Eventually getting good quality is one thing, but the whole creative process to me is just as (or even more) important.
Film looks better and it's more fun to shoot with. Digital is great if you want sterile, lifeless images you can take with a supercomputer that does the work for you.
IMO, "better" is wholly dependent on what you do with your photography. if I worked full time and made my living with photography (I do not), I think digital is mandatory. If you travel internationally as well, where film availability is limited, so much the more. If you are a hobbyist and like to make very large exhibition prints, particularly B&W (I do), then film is only the way to go, as "inksquirt" B&W prints just suck by comparison to traditional "wet" prints. Cost is also a factor. Non-pros who cannot tax deduct their equipment are hard pressed to drop $10k - !5k on a body and lens or two for his Fuji MF digital compared to $2k - 4k for a top of the line film MF system. If all you do is shoot color snap shots to post to social media, my 10 year old, 8 meg, Canon Sureshot mini-digital is more than you need. The vast majority of camera and lens buyers make buying decisions without regard to technical needs and equipment capacity. The decision is often governed by what's in vogue, popular, looks cool, etc.
A quick way to be humbled is to look at the best work that is being done with one's "old camera" and compare it to one's own. This mind game has saved me a lot of money. Good video.
Well said. I love film and shoot it because it's what I learned on and I enjoy it but the format doesn't matter at all. In my opinion over processing of images might be more off putting than the simple fact that someone used a digital camera. But even then it comes down to style and taste, not better or worse.
Nice, thank you
The best camera is the one in Stephen Milner's hand😀 Which is better 50mega pixel MF camera or the advance high mega pixel full frame cameras. No correct answerer to any of these questions just, "pick a camera, any camera," then just go create! Eagerly awaiting your book.
Thank you. It’s taken me some time to pull this book together because I have been learning about book manufacturing. Thanks for being patient.
Great video. Thank you for posting. I agree with all that you share here. I enjoy and continue to shoot film because of its look - I choose a film for a given scenario and it is typically pleasing without manipulation, because I have greater confidence in the longevity of my slides and negatives versus the digital files, and because I like the process of making film images - including the insecurities/anticipation of nailing proper exposure and waiting for development that I am doing like my parents and my grandparents. I look forward to the future videos that you will post and I feel that you are putting your energies in very important and interesting directions. Cheers from Canada
Nice words, thank you. You raise some good points here about the insecurities and anticipation of film photography that I missed in this video. Film is such a good teacher for becoming comfortable with the imperfections of photography, especially film, and patience.
I shoot both - recently upgraded my X-T4 to the GFX100S (I’m in the Waikato too if you ever want try one of the lenses I have that you might not: 30mm, 35-70, 100-200 + 1.4x t/c and 80mm 1.7 👍).
Film for me is more of an indulgence. Definitely leans more of the hobby side of things. The PressPan 35mm panoramic camera I have is challenging to shoot, but super rewarding!
Nice, that will be awesome. We should catch up.
@@StephenMilner for sure! Flick me a message anytime 👍
Great video Stephen! Definitely super keen to see more content like this.
Thanks mate
Stephen I agree with you're comments, I shoot more film mainly B&W, but I also like to shoot digtal. Like other comments to appreciate film you need to learn the art of the three most important things on the camera, then learn how to read light & shadows.
I did weddings back in the 80's and 90's all with film, its true you never stop learning with film.
But as you say you are an artist so what you do and shoot you can't please everyone.
I am on a website for B&W photography I post my images and love the feed back and along with criticism, its how you get a better photographer, If you dont like the feed back then dont post.
Keep up the excellent work..
Nice words, Mick. Thank you
I started with 35mm film using the Minolta x500, then advanced into medium format with Mamiya 645 and RZ67 and finally to large format with a Horseman 4x5 field camera. It was a great experience, learnt much from trial and error but it was costly. After years of film I then moved to digital starting a Sony RX10, then to Canon 5Ds and now Fuji 50s II medium format. Did starting with film help, yes if you can afford the cost and time but I find digital allows me to be much more creative and experimental now and coupled with the advances in affordable printing up to A2 at home is much more fulfilling and satisfying for my creative expression.
Thanks, Keith
Hi. I guess âge has some advantages…. I started photography as a kid in the 1940s with Ansco camera shooting 127 roll film then shot roll film 120 till 135 Kodachrome 25 a film probably in some ways better than Velvia 50
Long story short I shot architecture with an Arca Swiss 69 medium format view camera. That and the Pentax 67 are my fav film cameras.
I shot Fuji film 100S now. Moving from architecture to landscape has shown me how limited my photo skills really were.
My main reason for moving from Fuji X series and Olympus 43 digital was to get more wide angle from tilt shift lenses.
I used a Cambo Actus for a while with the GFX 50S, very great camera body / tool but did not like having to set up the camera each time I used it.
The point of this long monologue is simply to agree that cameras are just tools. One is not better than the other. Digital happens to be very efficient and cheaper than film. It also eliminates the scanning process.
But shooting film without a built in light meter and no auto functions is a good way to improve one’s craft.
Your work looks great.
Check out tilt shift or just tilt lenses. Fun, powerful efficient for big panoramas
Hey, thanks for your interesting story. It sounds like you have a good setup. I would like a tilt lens. There is wide angle one on the Fujifilm GFX lens roadmap. Would love to try it out.
I personally think digital is better. The tech of cameras now a days means, that the "film look" or 'style' can be achieved with digital, and no one would know the difference. It's more about the process than the output in my opinion. If the intentionality and motivation is there i don't think it matters either way. But I'm no photographer. As a film maker any camera from the last few years is going to give you amazing images. But also a new camera can be inspiration or motivation in its self. I get excited about new lenses and cameras all the time.
Thanks mate, nice points.
That's the whole process, you need to be happy with your own Photos before you can make other happy, it's as you said not about gear but about feeling. Once I'm in the mood for Film another moment I'm in the mood to shoot Digital, with lenses the same, 24-105 zoom (new) and another moment I just take my vintage 50mm 1.4 and make stunning photos with that....or at least that's what I think! And there it all starts! Thanks good video.
Thank you, nice words
Cool video Steven, and you're right. None of both types of medium are better than the other. Technically maybe a different story, but it is a very personal choice. Film suits me better because it forces me to slow down, and I spend less time with my face behind the glass and more out there. And I enjoy the process and aesthetic just too much for me to even bother thinking switching to digital. And it's just that - a recording tool, it's about how you use it. Still shooting and enjoying my Mamiya 645 Super and Hasselblad 500c, and to me that's a lot about the crop ratio as well as how the camera feels and operates. I also stick almost exclusively with black and white film, also because of the simplicity and aesthetics. Even got a v850 scanner to replace my v600 - the quality and operation are far superior and do let me enjoy my negatives even more. Eventually getting good quality is one thing, but the whole creative process to me is just as (or even more) important.
Nice words, Dennis. Thank you
Film looks better and it's more fun to shoot with.
Digital is great if you want sterile, lifeless images you can take with a supercomputer that does the work for you.
IMO, "better" is wholly dependent on what you do with your photography. if I worked full time and made my living with photography (I do not), I think digital is mandatory. If you travel internationally as well, where film availability is limited, so much the more. If you are a hobbyist and like to make very large exhibition prints, particularly B&W (I do), then film is only the way to go, as "inksquirt" B&W prints just suck by comparison to traditional "wet" prints. Cost is also a factor. Non-pros who cannot tax deduct their equipment are hard pressed to drop $10k - !5k on a body and lens or two for his Fuji MF digital compared to $2k - 4k for a top of the line film MF system. If all you do is shoot color snap shots to post to social media, my 10 year old, 8 meg, Canon Sureshot mini-digital is more than you need. The vast majority of camera and lens buyers make buying decisions without regard to technical needs and equipment capacity. The decision is often governed by what's in vogue, popular, looks cool, etc.
Thanks, Randall. All good points.