Digital photography has proven its superiority over film, but still the victory is not final. There is something attractive about the film. Something that makes you study with trepidation the warmth of the colors and the unique grain of the surface of the photo card. Of course, someone will object and say that all these properties can be given to a digital photograph in a graphics editor. Perhaps the film is used by those who are nostalgic for the old days.
All pictures in the examples were taken with the same settings on a Nikon D800 digital camera and a Nikon F100 film camera. Both use the same Nikon 50mm f/1.4 lens.
On the left is a film frame. The number is on the right. Aperture: f/2.8-, shutter speed: -1/1600-, Light sensitivity -ISO: 100.
Advantages of shooting with a film camera
- The film has a small number of frames. Each frame costs a certain amount, so the photographer has to choose the subject and set up the camera more intelligently. It is impossible to view the material right away, so you have to hone your skills in setting all camera parameters to perfection. After all, there is no graphic editor either.
- Film cameras are much cheaper than digital cameras. Anyone can afford such a device and start shooting.
- Film has a wider dynamic range than digital. This means that high-contrast scenes with difficult lighting will look better on film. Although, looking at the latest developments in the field of digital photography, it is worth noting that modern mid- and professional-class devices have functions for expanding the dynamic range and HDR shooting modes.
- Film rangefinder cameras are quite cheap, although digital analogues appeared only in 2006 and have a higher cost.
- Film grain gives the image a certain magic and attractiveness, while digital noise simply kills the frames.
- The battery of film cameras lasts much longer due to lower energy consumption than in the case of digital devices.
On the left is a film frame. On the right is digital. Aperture: f/1.8-, shutter speed: 1/320-, light sensitivity -ISO: 100.
Negative qualities of film
- Developing, scanning, and the film itself cost money.
- The process of obtaining an image on photographic paper is labor-intensive and requires special equipment and knowledge.
- Professionals have photo laboratories at home, but this is not convenient for everyone, so many photographers cannot get their pictures without the participation of an intermediary - a developing studio.
- The film must be stored in cases. Each one needs to be signed. Over time, a lot of them will accumulate and you will have to allocate a large space for storage.
- In order to convert a film frame into digital, it must be scanned, and this will lead to a loss of quality.
On the left is a film frame, on the right is a digital frame. Aperture: f/5-, shutter speed: -1/640-, light sensitivity -ISO: 100.
The benefits of digital photography
- Digital devices work much faster than film devices. They don't need time to rewind frames. Such cameras the best way suitable for photographing events that require maximum reaction and speed. This includes reportage photography, sports competitions and animal photography.
- The memory card is much smaller than film. At the same time, you can store many more pictures on it.
- The footage can be viewed immediately.
- To edit a frame, you just need to load it into a graphics editor, rather than engage in grueling digitization with loss of quality. Also, most cameras are capable of saving images in RAW format, which allows you to work directly with the information that the camera sensor receives without losing quality.
- The vast majority of digital cameras can shoot video. Modern devices they do it at the level of movie cameras.
- Digital cameras make it possible to manipulate the light sensitivity of the sensor and white balance. In the case of film, in order to change one of these parameters, you will have to change the type of film. Until the film is completely used up, it cannot be removed from the camera.
Film on the left, digital on the right. Aperture: f/2.8-, shutter speed: -1/400, light sensitivity -ISO: 100.
Disadvantages of Digital Photography
- High cost of digital photographic equipment.
- Cheap digital cameras make too many changes to the resulting image when converting to Jpeg. Transitions in bright areas are poorly conveyed, and pictures become overly contrasty.
- The matrix becomes clogged. This leads to the need for a painstaking procedure to clean the sensor. Otherwise, long exposures will show dust spots in your photos.
- An archive of digital photographs must be kept on reliable media and preferably backed up. If the hard drive is damaged, all information will be lost. The likelihood of film damage is lower.
On the left is a film frame, on the right is a digital frame. Aperture: f/5.6-, shutter speed: -1/250-, photosensitivity: -ISO 100, flash.
Does anyone still shoot on film these days? After all, it’s 2017 and digital technologies were supposed to destroy analog photography... A completely expected development of events, but in fact this did not happen - just as paper books, lamp technology and vinyl players did not become a thing of the past. Moreover, in recent years, analog photography has been rapidly returning to the lives of modern photographers.
Since the early 2000s, all we've heard about is how film is dying. One by one, the once numerous minilabs were closed, and day after day manufacturers announced the discontinuation of film cameras and the films themselves. In 2006, Nikon released its last scanners (which remain unsurpassed to this day), around the same time optical ones completely disappeared printing machines, giving way to digital ones. It was difficult to even imagine that analogue photography could survive for at least some time.
However, 10 years have passed and humanity has become homesick for physical material, returning more and more in thoughts and deeds to analog technologies. Gradually, news began to appear about the revival of film production and the release of new materials. At first, this news looked like the madness of individual enthusiasts (which is not far from the truth), but over time, more and more high-profile brands began to join in.
Perhaps it all started in 2008, exactly when, according to the laws of evolution, everything should have ended. In these difficult times for analog photography, the Impossible company emerges, which buys and restores the factory that produced Polaroid cassettes. The seemingly crazy project remains alive and is still actively developing.
A significant increase in interest in instant photography was also anticipated (and perhaps shaped) by Fujifilm, which began with new strength develop the once popular Instax direction. To date, their products have won the lion's share instant photography market worldwide. There are rumors that by 2017, Fujifilm's profits from instant cassettes/cameras almost exceeded profits from the sale of digital cameras, but these are, of course, just rumors.
However, sales of Fuji Instax cameras have been growing steadily since 2013. At the end of 2016, the company sold more than 5 million cameras. According to research conducted by Fujifilm and cited by European CEO magazine, the main users of cameras are representatives younger generation- those who were born and raised in the digital era. The same source indicates that according to research by Ilford, 30% of their film users are under 35 years of age, while 60% of all users first started shooting film in the last 5 years.
A few years later, in 2012, in the USA, enthusiasts created the company CineStill, which began repackaging Kodak film for the needs of photographers. It is worth noting that Kodak never stopped the production of film materials, because this is the main income of their analog division, because For cinema, film is purchased by the kilometer.
The creators of CineStill have invented and patented a unique technology for removing the soot layer from film films. This allowed them to establish large-scale re-production of films developed using the C-41 process. In 2016, CineStill introduced new technologies and released 120-type medium format film, which, along with narrow format 35 mm, is successfully sold all over the world through an established distribution network for the goods they produce.
Then, in 2012, a group of other enthusiasts began restoring the Italian Ferrania film factory. In 2015, the factory released the first trial batches of b/w photo and film, in 2016 trial batches of Scotch Chrome and Solaris films, and in February 2017 announced the release of the first batch of the new b/w photographic film P30.
In order to start restoration work, Ferrania announced a fundraiser on Kickstarter and instead of the required amount of $250,000, they raised $322,000.
Another swallow sang in the summer of 2013, when Ilford first opened a developing and analog printing laboratory in California. Even in the heyday of film, Ilford limited its production activities exclusively to the UK.
But the main boom of analog technologies began in 2015, when news about the return of film photography began to pour out of a cornucopia.
In the fall of that year, the British dragstore chain Boots announced the start of sales of Ilford b/w film in 450 of its locations.
Let us remember that Boots position themselves not just as pharmacies, but also as stores of essential goods. In addition to Ilford films, all Boots sell 35mm Fujifilm and Lomography films.
One of the Boots stores, December 2016
In the same year, Quentin Tarantino’s already legendary “The Hateful Eight” was released on cinema screens, even the credits for which were made using scissors and paper. This film was shot on 65mm Kodak Vision 3 film, with rental copies printed in 35mm and 70mm formats. To show his film, Tarantino restored more than 50 medium-format cinemas in the United States. In Russia, the film copy was rented at the Oktyar cinema in January 2016, and each session invariably attracted a full house of viewers who wanted to evaluate the quality of the film copy in contrast to the digital image.
Film “The Hateful Eight”, 2015
But Tarantino is not the only director who shoots on film. In the same year of 2015, many other films were shot on film, including “ star Wars. Episode 7", "World Jurassic period", "Mission Impossible", "Number 44" (Child 44), "007: Spectre", "Night Fugitive", " Steve Jobs" etc.
Perhaps it was thanks to Tarantino and the support of Hollywood that 2015 became a turning point for Kodak, whose sales increased for the first time in many years.
According to statica.com as of mid-2016
The following year, 2016, continued the momentum, giving the world such film films as “Suicide Squad”, “La La Land”, “Jason Bourne”, “American Honey”, “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”, “Midnight Special” issue”, “Hail Caesar!”, “Castle”, “Jane Takes a Gun”, “Sing Street”, “Paterson” and many, many others.
It would seem, what does cinema have to do with photography if we are talking about photography? The fact is that the production of photographic films and films is based on similar technologies and partly on the same equipment, so the film industry largely supports the photographic industry.
It is curious that not only full-length films are shot on film, but also series - for example, “Breaking Bad” from the 2nd to the last season in 2013.
TV series "Breaking Bad", 2008-2013
Another interesting fact- also in 2015, the market for vinyl players and records experienced phenomenal growth. This is what the graph looks like for mid-2016, according to the Consumer Electronics Technology Association:
In 2016, Leica again drew attention to analog photography and announced the start of production of Leica Sofort instant photography cameras using Fuji Instax Mini cassettes as consumables.
The Russian film community was not spared the news either. In 2016, one of the members of the “Rangefinder” club, Denis Korablev, production facilities One of the military industry factories (which one he keeps strictly secret) began producing its own b/w photographic film, known among amateurs as “Type D”. He himself developed the emulsion of this film and continues to improve it.
And now comes 2017, which in the first two months brings several fresh news from the world of analog photography.
On January 5, KODAK announced the resumption of production of the legendary Kodak Ektachrome positive film, which was discontinued in 2012. The reason given is the steady increase in sales of professional photographic films over the past few years, caused by the surge in popularity of analog photography throughout the world. Kodak promises the appearance of this film on store shelves in 35 mm and Super 8 (cinema) formats in the fourth quarter of 2017.
In the same month, that is, in January 2017, the Italian Film Ferrania reported on the release of the first alpha batch of P30 from the assembly line.
And in mid-February 2017, the French company Bergger released the newly invented Pancro400 photographic film. This film was their first new development over the past 15 years, and should go on sale in March of this year. Possessing a classic emulsion, Pancro400 is distinguished by the favorable location of the anti-halo layer between the substrate and the emulsion on the emulsion side, which significantly reduces reflections in the layers of photographic film and increases the degree of image detail.
To the piggy bank good news and facts, you can add modest statistics from the film laboratory SREDA film lab, which works on Russian market film photography since autumn 2015.
Despite the rapid revival of interest in analog technologies throughout the world, of course, film photography has been and remains the preserve of a narrow circle of aesthetes, art photographers and progressive youth. However, the number of amateur photographers who prefer the completely impractical but incredibly inspiring processes of analog magic is growing every day. It is quite possible that film photography is just beginning its renaissance, and in the coming years we will see something very unexpected from the point of view of the evolution of human development. Wait and see!
Don’t forget to follow the accounts of the Creative Laboratory “SREDA” on social networks!
IN modern world Digital photography has almost completely replaced the good old film footage. And all because the new generation of cameras is easier to use. Finished photographs can be printed on a regular printer, while film has to be developed in a dark room and only then transferred to paper. However, there are still photographers who prefer to create masterpieces using a regular film camera. One of them - Oleg Oprisko from Lvov (Ukraine).
The photographer creates simply stunning collages, where nature is the background, and the main actors are young girls. Before starting work, the author thinks through everything to the smallest detail: the models’ makeup, clothes, environment. He tries to think through the color background of the finished photo, carefully selecting the props.
Oleg Oprisko often organizes seminars for photographers, where people come with expensive cameras costing 2-3 thousand dollars. But on the table in front of the lecturer lies an old film camera worth 50 dollars. This situation once again emphasizes the adage “all that glitters is not gold.” If a person is talented, then he will create a masterpiece with the help of an ordinary “soap box,” while no super-expensive equipment will help a mediocre person. The only thing he regrets Oleg Oprisko– this is about what a film camera doesn’t do.
Despite the current hegemony of digital technology in the photography industry, the debate over whether film photography is better or digital photography continues. Some insist on the uniqueness of film color reproduction and admire the characteristic grain, others persist: a digital photograph can be given any look through processing, and longing for film is nothing more than a nostalgic weakness.
The editors of Bird In Flight collected the most common arguments from both sides and, together with photographer Roman Pashkovsky, conducted an experiment, the purpose of which was to clearly demonstrate the difference between digital and film photography. To do this, they compared photographs taken with the same settings on two cameras with similar technical characteristics: digital Nikon D800 and film Nikon F100 (both with Nikon 50mm f/1.4 lens).
Film (left), digital (right). Settings: f/2.8, 1/1600 s, ISO 100.
Advantages of film
- Since shooting on film involves additional expenses, the photographer approaches each frame meaningfully and does not click the shutter thoughtlessly. The inability to immediately view the footage introduces an element of mystery into the process.
- Everyone can afford to buy an inexpensive film camera and start shooting today.
- Films, especially negative ones, have a much greater photographic latitude (dynamic range) than digital. Simply put, it is better to shoot contrasting and difficultly lit scenes on a negative - the picture will look more realistic. The advantage will be obvious if you use high-quality Fuji Pro film series with sensitivities of 160, 400 and 800 units and Kodak Portra, with sensitivities of 100, 160 and 400 units.
- Those who shoot on film can use rangefinder cameras - they are compact and have a quiet shutter. Digital analogues appeared back in 2006, but are more expensive.
- Grain, unlike digital noise, does not spoil the picture, but sometimes, on the contrary, gives it an artistic look.
- Film cameras are less energy-consuming, so their battery life is noticeably longer.
Film (left), digital (right). Settings: f/1.8, 1/320 s, ISO 100.
Disadvantages of film
- Film, developing, scanning frames - all this costs money.
- The process of obtaining a fingerprint is quite labor-intensive.
- If a photographer does not have his own laboratory at home, he always depends on a developing studio.
- Film storage requires special conditions.
- For further use of a film frame in programs, it must be digitized, and scanning always leads to a loss of image quality.
Film (left), digital (right). Settings: f/5, 1/640 s, ISO 100.
Advantages of numbers
- Digital cameras do not waste time rewinding frames, so they work faster and are better suited for shooting reports, sports and other dynamic events.
- You can store incomparably on a memory card more photos than on film, and it itself does not take up much space.
- Images can be viewed immediately.
- To edit a photo, you don't need to bother digitizing it. In addition, most DSLRs can save images in RAW format, which allows you to adjust settings after shooting.
- Many digital cameras can shoot video.
- Digital shooting allows you to control photosensitivity and white balance - parameters that, in the case of film, are strictly tied to the photographic material.
Film (left), digital (right). Settings: f/2.8, 1/400 s, ISO 100.
Disadvantages of numbers
- The cost of the camera is usually higher.
- Budget digital cameras do not convey the gradation of bright parts of the image well and make the photo too contrasty.
- The matrix needs to be cleaned periodically. Otherwise, they accumulate on it fine particles, which are noticeable in photographs taken at long exposures.
- If damaged hard drive the photo archive may be destroyed. Films suffer less often.
Views: 22811
Comments:
Dmitry Nikolaev
Well, only the negative has a large photographic latitude, because of this, tonal compression of the image occurs. With a slide it’s the other way around - a small input range and a huge output range. Regarding resolution, a modern full-frame camera will still produce more details than a 35mm film camera (it all depends on the scanner). Plus film processing: most of laboratories were closed, the remaining ones work only with the S-41 process and only with 135th film, those who develop bw or 120th big city only a few people, not counting those who, like me, for example, manifest on their own. There are only a few reasons to tinker with film: black and white and medium format. Well, yes, the process, of course - it’s really addictive, it’s worth trying at least for the last stage, when you take the coil out of the tank after washing, plop it into the wetting agent and unroll the film with pictures that came from God knows where)
15.12.2015 - 02:49:06
Sergey Kirillovich Vinogradov
I'm an old, washed-up film-maker. Before digital, I shot on film for thirty-five years. I still look at my film camera and my hands reach out to take it, not the digital one, with me. And only rationalism wins: I take film very rarely. I am ready to argue with some statements. For example: “Film cameras use less energy, so their battery life is noticeably longer.” This is not true. The Minolta a707si film DSLR, for example, guarantees the owner 25 films from one battery. This means about 900 frames. The Sony DSLR-a580 digital SLR allows you to take more than 1000 (one thousand) frames on a freshly charged battery. At least one flow level. there are several other comments, let's say the matrix size is not mentioned, despite the fact that the film is always FF, and this is a very serious argument in favor of the film. Then the current film is AS A RULE scanned or re-photographed on a digital digital camera and then processed in FS. Further. The cost of photographic films and their processing for Last year has grown almost threefold and has become very difficult to lift for a beginning amateur, who is now cheaper to buy a not-so-cool digital digital camera and begin to hone his photography skills with it. The cost of old film cameras has also increased today and amounts to 600-800 US dollars. Based on this, it is clear that some of the authors' recommendations today... at least for this time, are outdated. I cannot recommend the article for social networks, I don't want to be disappointed.
27.12.2015 - 05:26:17
Vitaly
I have already had occasion to speak out on this topic, which has now become a topical one, somewhere here. Let me say this again. Perhaps this will be useful to someone.
It would seem that no one else but me could sing hosannas to film, praising its merits and advantages over digital. Well, judge for yourself, I have more than forty years of work with film and optical printing, hundreds of prestigious exhibitions all over the planet, together with almost all the masters of the world artistic photography, as well as the highest world awards in the field of photography, and much more... And therefore, I believe, it is difficult to suspect me of amateurism or bias, and let the one who has achieved more in photography throw a stone at me after what I say next.
The Great Digital Revolution has happened! She freed the masses from the shackles of photographic routine. People now have cameras in their hands with fantastic capabilities that could not have been dreamed of just recently. And it depends only on you whether they will become a simple instrument for recording the surrounding reality or an instrument of creativity. It seems like - create, invent, try!
But no! There are also people who, contrary to the obvious, still talk about the superiority of film over “digital”, about the romance of a dark bathroom with a red lantern, about some mythical “noble film grain”.
In response to these maxims, I want to say the following. Of course, even today there are areas of photography where film is preferable to digital. However, these types of photography are far beyond the needs of not only ordinary amateur photographers, but also the vast majority of professionals. And if someone does not see the qualitative superiority of “digital” even in the work of experienced craftsmen, then he should contact an ophthalmologist.
In our time, photographing on film is justified only out of curiosity. In all other cases - clean water stupidity, just like going to another city on a cart. Today this is the lot of all sorts of enthusiasts who have not seen the era of analogue photography, and fixated and mossy mastodons who do not want to adequately perceive reality.
05.01.2016 - 21:42:29
Sergey Sergeev
I’ll warn you right away - I’m not a professional photographer, but an electrical engineer by education and an IT specialist by profession. Well, and an amateur photographer with over 30 years of experience. I use both digital and film equipment (if anyone is interested, everything is on my resume).
And, this is my personal opinion, as a technician - of course, purely theoretical - in practice everything is somewhat different and more complicated (or, conversely, simpler :-)).
Theoretically, a digital Bayer matrix will never produce the same picture as photographic film. The reason for this is as simple as 5 Soviet kopecks. This reason is the single-layer matrix. The matrix consists of individual photodetectors, each of which perceives only 1/3 (!!!) of the color information of the image area. The remaining information is interpolated. That is, in reality the matrix registers only a third (!) of the color information from the light flux incident on it! The rest is “thought out”, calculated by the camera processor (RAW converter) using some algorithms! Digital camera“lies” to us by more than 60% (but, for the sake of truth, he lies skillfully! :-)) That’s it, curtain! This is the main and insurmountable (as far as I know) reason at the moment.
There have been attempts to make three-layer matrices (Foveon X3 from Fuji and some other from Nikon). But other problems arise there, which, as far as I know, have not been resolved so far.
Concerning practical side question - here you, dear photographers, know everything better than me - and, dear Vitaly, (see previous post) is absolutely right.
It was only about 15 years ago that camera manufacturers brought us to the dawn of digital photography. Rumors spread that the film was dead. Although most professionals have moved from film to digital, film is still a very popular format that is worth exploring.
Where to start working with film
For those new to photography, film may seem like an outdated format that no longer makes sense. But I'm not going to spend the rest of this article trying to compare digital and film photography to convince you otherwise! They require different techniques, but much of what you learn through film photography can help you with digital photography.
Although my photography experience began with a digital camera, it wasn't until I picked up a film camera one day that I really began to understand ISO, exposure, aperture, and the time it takes to get the right shot!
Film and digital
While the choice between a film and a digital camera is always up to the photographer, there are several fundamental elements to film photography that I consider to be major advantages over digital. With a film camera, you do all the work yourself, so you have to understand physical process creating a frame and must adjust the exposure correctly.
There is no way to click a button, look at the display and try again. For me, this means that I am much more involved in the process of creating images. I also know that electronic brains digital cameras won't do all the work for me.
Expenses
The price is also worth considering. Many people believe that film photography is much more expensive due to the need to buy film and pay for developing and printing, but a good film camera will last a lifetime. My old Pentax is older than I am, but it works great and shows no sign of becoming obsolete.
In the case of digital cameras, updates occur almost annually. Manufacturers strive to ensure that you keep up with technology, have more pixels, latest features and the sharpest shots. Of course, these updates are very useful, but in the end they result in additional expenses.
Film formats
There are several different types of film suitable for different purposes. The main types are negative (black and white and color) and reversible (slide). The most popular film size is 35 mm. Many single lens SLR Cameras(SLR) and rangefinder cameras use this type of film. It is usually sold in 24 or 36 frame reels.
The other two main formats are medium format film and wide format film. Medium format film is much larger than 35mm film and is designed for medium format cameras. Medium format is considered to provide better quality than 35mm and is therefore still used by many professional photographers. It comes in 120 or 220 format.
Almost all medium format cameras can work with 120 format, because... this film is covered with a layer of opaque paper along its entire length (racord). There is no 220 film, it is only covered with paper at the beginning and end, so only some cameras can handle it, but the lack of a leader along the entire length allows you to include more film in the reel, 2 times more to be exact.
Wide format film differs from 35mm and medium format in that it is produced in separate sheets of 4 x 5 inches (or even larger), and is loaded into special film holders. She must refuel in the dark. Each holder only holds two frames. The traditional photo vest with all these pockets was originally created for large format users. You really need a lot of pockets to fit all those film holders.
Film types
Once you have decided which format you will work with, you need to choose from a variety available types films. In addition to the types mentioned above, companies such as Fuji, Ilford, Kodak and Agfa produce a huge variety of films. Each has different capabilities depending on light sensitivity, purpose and contrast.
You can write about this topic separate article, but before you rush out and buy a bunch of reels, check the description on the film manufacturer's website to see which one best suits your needs. Also try not to use the cheapest film; if you have good camera, and you want to get amazing photos, then it's worth using professional quality film.
Film cameras
If you're venturing into the realm of film photography, you'll be faced with the choice of a film camera. Just like in the world of digital photography, there are different types cameras for different purposes. The most popular cameras, as I mentioned above, are 35mm. They range from automatic point-and-shoot cameras and simple (but professional) rangefinder cameras to SLR cameras with full manual (or fully automated) control.
Next are medium format cameras, which are a little more bulky, but with their help you can create larger frames with a higher “resolution”. If you really want to start with something simpler, you can even try a Lomo or toy camera, which are very fashionable these days and are designed to be very easy to use.
Patience, discipline and the right settings
One of the main differences between shooting digital and shooting film is that with film you don't have the opportunity to evaluate your shots as you go. This may be hard for some of you to get used to. You can no longer use trial and error. I think this is not bad.
When you're shooting on film, you'll need to spend a little more time making sure you set the exposure correctly for the available light, which is where a light meter can be very useful. You will need to check that you have composed the composition exactly the way you want and that you are happy with the photo you are about to take. For all this, you need to have a good understanding of your camera. So make sure you read the instructions or spend enough time mastering them.
With discipline and patience, a much higher percentage of your film shots will be good quality, and practice helped me greatly improve my overall photography as I began to spend time on each shot rather than just clicking away and hoping I'd get the shot I wanted.
Development
Once you've shot the film, you need to be patient before you can see the results. For me that's part of the fun. When you decide to develop your film, make sure you do it correctly. If you are unfamiliar with the developing process or don't have the resources to do so, take it to a lab to have it developed for you.
Remember, if you trust someone else to develop your film, take it to a place where you know it will be handled carefully, rather than paying a couple of dollars at the local store. If possible, try to learn how to manifest yourself. This is a very important part of film photography and will provide you with much more high level control over the result.
Scanning and uploading to the Internet
Once you have your prints, you'll likely want to transfer them to your computer somehow. Some darkrooms will be able to burn your photos to disk for you, but please do not consider this as an alternative to prints. This will greatly weaken the entire process. It's a magical moment when you look at your new prints for the first time.
You can then also scan the footage to save it to your computer, which is generally great, just remember that a bad scanner will greatly harm the quality of the images. Once scanned, you can upload your beautiful new film footage online and show the world how great they look. And don't just leave your prints collecting dust in a box somewhere!
Creativity
Now it's your turn to give film photography a chance. Hopefully you've gained a better understanding of what film photography is, but there's still a lot more to learn. Try getting a film camera. Save a few pennies and find one on Ebay, or go and look in the attic of your parents' house.
You can go shooting with a digital camera or a film camera and experience both at the same time. Compare the results and continue experimenting with film. Soon you'll be ready to try self-processing the results of your experiments!
Loading...
