Comments on: Pro photographers who still use film

By: The Modern Debate: Is It Wrong to Manipulate/Retouch Images? | Eternal Forms Photography

Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:41:35 +0000

[...] graced photographers with an ever-expanding set of tools for their craft. Although photographic film is still utilized by a large number of professional photographers, many have kept pace with these technological [...]

By: Jerry Sparrow

Jerry Sparrow — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 16:10:07 +0000

Sorry to post twice but some other points that are rarely discussed.
1. Micro-filming in the US has almost exclusively returned to film due to the archival storage issues of digital. The cost and time involved in transferring all of the digital data to the newest storage media every so many years was prohibitive.
2. I can take a Matthew Brady glass plate and still enlarge it in my darkroom some 150 years later, what are they going to read that CD with in 150 years?
3. I still have ALL of my film images and can print any of them at will, But have one computer crash without good backups and guess what.
4. Most of us old pros can tell you in detail how the whole process works, from the silver halides in the film and paper to the chemical make-up of the developer and how to tweak the process because we understood the “technology”. Most digital phtogs can only give a very basic overview of how the whole digital thing works because of the technology involved.
5. The digital “workflow” model is false economy. When you consider that you must upgrade your cameras every few years, buy new computers, and the latest software. I still shoot with a Mamiya C3 twin lens from the ’60s, and the resolution of my image is based on the film not the camera, so I don’t need to buy a new 24 MP camera to stay competitive only new film.

By: Jerry Sparrow

Jerry Sparrow — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:43:17 +0000

I shoot commercial work and mainly food photography for my restaurant clients.
I feel digital just doesn’t have the depth or range of color that film has. Digital also falls apart at extreme enlargement a case in point: My 120 shots have been shown on the big screen in local theaters for one of my clients and holds up beautifully, I don’t think digital could boast the same results unless I spend thousands on a leaf back for my 4×5, which I certainly cannot justify.
I also feel digital has the unfortunate capability of turning what would have been amateurs and hacks 20 years ago into pros. After all just erase and re-shoot and if it still isn’t right after the tenth time you can just photo-chop it and voila a sellable image. I come from a background as a Navy photographer and we had to capture everything from plane crashes and crime scenes to re-enlistment ceremonies on film.
And guess what if you didn’t get the shot or it was screwed up too damned bad. Now obviously things like a plane crash you either get it or you don’t even with digital. But if you underexposed the award ceremony you only had so much you could do to fix it, so it better be right the first time!
Finally the digital pro will never know the joy of working in a darkroom, flashing paper to bring out detail in the highlights or adding a 10% Potassium bromide solution to the developer to increase the warm tones in a BW print.
Nor will they ever know how to color correct a print with CC filters (BTW you color correct for perfect whites, since it is a known entity, and everything else will usually fall into place).
Film rules, digital just fools.

By: How many pros still use film? - Seite 4 - Leica User Forum

How many pros still use film? - Seite 4 - Leica User Forum — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 07:37:45 +0000

[...] more organic and digital can not replicate that as far as I’ve seen." …look at this link Pro photographers who still use film Best [...]

By: Best of 2010 – Our Favorite Photo Blog Posts of the Year ‹ The PhotoShelter Blog

Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:06:55 +0000

[...] Pro photographers who still use film | Kristina Feliciano, Stockland Martel [...]

By: James D'Ambrosio

James D'Ambrosio — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:12:28 +0000

I began with film, and after much work in digital, have nearly exclusively returned to film, not only for all the reasons shared by other professionals, but for the cameras themselves.

In terms of my Leica system, for instance, I use an M2 from 1958, and Leitz lenses dating back to 1929. Why?

There’s a certain quality and character of these old lenses that, in my view, can’t be reproduced by the modern digital age, at least, not “organically” produced without intensive use of post-processing software, which, for me, takes away the magic of photography, the instant of the image. By spending hours manipulating an image, you’ve removed “the moment”, and now it becomes something else.

Since these old lenses were computed by hand with early lens design, and put together by hand, they have imperfections when discussing them within the modern day designs, and it is these imperfections that, for me, make them beautiful, and different in a world where digital photography is beginning to all look the same.

In addition to these imperfect characteristics, it the history of these vintage cameras and lenses that also grabs hold of my heart and passion: when I pick up this gear, my hands and eyes are part of a continuing story. There have been generations of human being using this equipment, seeing and experiencing the world, long before me, and will long after I am gone.

I am part of a story much larger than my own life, and this is thrilling!

You just can’t get this from a new digital camera fresh out of the box that hasn’t seen anything nor been anywhere before you.

This is why I use film.

By: jason gold

jason gold — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:04:40 +0000

Film has that added depth and a singular beauty that digital hasn’t. I use digital for MOST jobs due to time and cost reasons. Most of my stuff headed for internet.
The joy of film is using beautifully crafted cameras.Design and a joy to work with unlike the plastic glob of digital. Sure film cameras don’t have all those features.. So even pros go to the Green-Auto Button!The wonderful range of tones and colors.The contrast fighting built in! No melted foreheads a la digital.
You can look at one’s slides from decades ago.
Digital will not be like that!
If NASA cannot read their early data, what chance do we have?

By: alittletoofast.com » Blog Archive » Why film?

alittletoofast.com » Blog Archive » Why film? — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:21:25 +0000

[...] out this great post on the Stockland Martel blog from photographers who still shoot film. People ask me ALL the time why I shoot film. Why, why, [...]

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 21:49:42 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by stocklandmartel: Pro photographers who still use film: http://wp.me/pqdVV-HP…

By: Pro photographers who still use film « Stockland Martel | The Click

Pro photographers who still use film « Stockland Martel | The Click — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:50:08 +0000

[...] It’s not often you see a professional photographer taking the time to formally survey his colleagues about an issue, but that’s just what San Diego–based shooter Robert Benson has done at his blog. Curious about professional photographers who still use film—he calls them “the holdouts”—he sent some questions to 11 shooters, including our own Jeff Lipsky. [...]