I love using film. I would far prefer to use it. Results in terms of colours, depth, clarity, all so much better. And you can scan prints in and then have all the flexibility of digital, no? However, I don't use film because I have no money, no job, pfft. It costs almost £10 to process 36 prints in the shop here, and I don't have any space or knowledge or money to set up a darkroom.
Yes. I've actually *started* using film more (as opposed to people who say they *still* use it) Just recently got into medium format photography and shot my first few rolls of 120mm film.
I began using 35mm cameras for candid stuff, but have recently bought some more professional quality films (such as Portra or Ilford Delta) and have been using them for my professional shoots. I own nearly 10 film cameras personally as I've started collecting them, and my boyfriend owns about 20 himself that I can borrow.
I still use it, both for my own reasons and professionally. That also includes motion picture. Please, have a look at my gallery. Most stuff you can see there are all analogue. Even my profilepicture. I just looooove film! It's the four-lettered word that matters!
I do. I love being in the darkroom, and using film. I like digital too, and working in photoshop with the files, but it isn't the same. There is just something different about the medium. I have to be so much more careful of what I take, that often I get better shots on my film than on my digital! I hope I never have to stop using film. I find it very peaceful, to be in the darkroom working. I get to think, and really enjoy what I'm doing. One of my favorite parts is watching the image appear in the developer. <3
Its all I use however I do have a digital P&S that I Use for when I need an image of something that does not need to be on film.
I dont care what is better its just what I prefer but if ever you are going to make a comparison only do that based on the entire "wet" process, a screen sized scan of a postcard size print is never going to look good no matter what.
The one thing I do love about film is that is easy and cheap (ish) to make very high resolution prints over 50 x 60 cm , not many people have to make prints that size , but I do.
Most of the images in my gallery are scans from 6x6 medium format and I think they are just as good as any digital capture of the same resolution .
I do however think film does have a big advantage when it comes to B&W
Digital is the only way to go when you need a digital image
But, there's something magical about good quality slide film that's hard to adequately explain if you haven't shot with it. I'm not quite sure what it is, but at some point I'll likely be getting myself a film body just to blow through a few rolls of it from time to time.
But, in a practical sense, I find that digital is much easier to deal with and manage than the countless boxes of slides that I would need to cover my whole collection. The last year alone, I would have over 2,000 slides to deal with.
Certainly. In lots of cases, digital is superior to film for one of a few reasons (ongoing costs, time to distribution, ease of use), but not always (the up front costs of digital medium format and rangefinders outweigh the ongoing cost of film for a good many people, for example). Additionally, there are a lot of cases where digital just isn't an option. Want a medium format rangefinder, a TLR, or a large format camera? Want to do multi-day exposures? Film is really your only option.