The debate between analog film photography versus digital photography has been settled for most of the photographing populace. This just in… digital is, by far, the choice of today and the future. This article is not about dredging up that debate for the modern photographer—instead, let’s take a look at that discussion through the lens of someone just starting out in photography—a first-year photo student or someone interested in picking up the hobby.
To qualify the analysis, permit me to add my personal background. I started in photography shooting film in a point-and-shoot camera for years, and then I “stepped up” to a Nikon N6006 SLR when I graduated from high school a couple of years ago. After about 10 years of SLR film shooting, I switched to digital and have only shot a few rolls of film since. I can count the number of hours I spent in a darkroom on one hand—I almost always developed my film through the mail or at photo stores. I am not a product of the darkroom film experience and I am not a pioneer of digital photography—nor do I pretend to be either. I do, however, teach photography in a small college in the Midwest, so I have a somewhat unique, if limited, perspective of how students, and beginning photographers, learn and grow photographically.
This article is written for two audiences: 1) the beginning photographer or brand-new photo student who is about to move past smartphone digital photography, purchase a “real” camera, and start taking photos, and, 2) veterans of both film and digital photography who wish to share their thoughts and experiences with those just starting out.
So, let’s look at the pros and cons of starting with film through the prism of a student or beginning photographer.
Photographs © Todd Vorenkamp
Cost
“Digital is free and film is expensive.” Or, at least that is what a lot of folks say. There is a bit more to that statement than meets the eye.
Digital cameras, when compared to film cameras in the same market bracket, are much more expensive than their analog counterparts. Of course, very few new 35mm film cameras are made today, but the secondhand market and the B&H Used Department have a fair share. If you are shopping used cameras, you can pick up a virtually bulletproof manual film camera for much less than a modern digital camera. Therefore, the initial cost of entering photography with film can be much less than digital.
However, film costs money and is single-use. Digital memory cards are relatively inexpensive these days and can be reused. Also, film needs to be developed. There is a cost associated with that. A roll of 36 35mm images printed at 5x7" at a local New York City lab costs about $20. Add the cost of the roll of film, and each time you release the shutter you are spending about $0.80. With that math, it takes a lot of film, but not a huge amount, to reach the cost of a digital camera and lens—shooting and developing 70 rolls of 36-exposure film will bring you to $2,000.
Surprise!... Oops...Yay!... Oops... Meh…Ugh…Yay!
The only thing immediate about film is the moment of capture. Everything else takes time. Release the shutter and it can be hours, days, weeks, or months before you see the image—depending on how much you are shooting and when you develop your roll. Finding a great print in a roll of film is a wonderful surprise for sure but, in today’s fast-paced world, not everyone has that kind of patience. Regardless of the current state, the right-now lives we all live, picking up a roll of prints is a lot like opening a gift; there are always surprises inside—some good and some not so good!
From a learning perspective, there is an enormous benefit to the ability to see your image immediately after capture. With this instant review, you can, unless the scene is totally dynamic, make needed adjustments in composition and exposure and re-take the image. Analyzing film images long after the photograph is made, will not have the same educational value, nor the opportunity to correct your mistakes and create a new image.
Another boon of digital is the capture of metadata, which is useful for Monday morning quarterback sessions. With film, if you need to recall your exposure data, you’ll need to capture notes manually as you are shooting—not always practical.
Old School
I am by no means a Luddite (I am writing this article on a computer), but there is something to be said for joining a technology in a traditional form. Like learning how to drive using a car with a manual transmission, learning photography with film gives one a certain foundation of knowledge from which to grow. Do you need to know how to drive a stick shift to be a good driver? No. Do you need to know how to create a wet plate collodion negative to be a good photographer? No. But, are both freaking cool? Yep.
Will shooting film make you an expert on pixel pitch and Bayer patterns, or film chemistry, for that matter? No. But, one could argue that your baseline knowledge, understanding, and appreciation of ISO will be greater when you load a roll of Kodak Professional Porta 400 into your camera and head out into the field than if your digital camera is defaulted to Auto ISO.
Last on this topic, there is an inherent pleasure in using a mechanical film camera; similar to wearing and winding a mechanical wristwatch daily. Many of the ’80s and ’90s-era electronic film cameras have found their way to the landfills of the world, but there are a lot of fully manual cameras available at the B&H Used Department and your local garage sales just waiting to be loaded, cranked, and fired.
Prints
I’ve said it before, and I will say it again: I do not print enough of my images. In the tangibility of the photographic print there is a connection to the physical that, as a photographer, you will not experience digitally. Holding a photograph in your hand and/or putting it on the fridge with a magnet, or framing and matting it, takes the photographic experience to its natural conclusion. Looking at an image on a back-lit computer screen and then posting it online in the hopes of getting “likes” is not the same experience that is gained by having a physical print.
Regardless of whether you are scanning negatives digitally, film generally ends up in prints and I believe every photographer should experience handling and seeing prints of their own work—regardless of the method of capture.
Screen Time
We spend a boatload of time looking at glowing rectangles—televisions, computer monitors, smartphones, tablets, and, yes, even our digital cameras with their electronic viewfinders and LCD screens. Analog photography removes you from that curse for a bit by getting you away from the need for (most) electricity. An optical viewfinder means you are truly looking at the world live—not at a miniature TV monitor. No more EVFs or LCDs glowing in your face. If you shoot film, regardless of whether you are doing your own darkroom work or dropping your film off at a lab, you will be missing out on the burden—and glowing screens—of the digital darkroom.
Walking around the city, dodging screen-staring automatons on every city block, I think that less time in front of glowing rectangles would be a good thing for all of us.
Slooooww Down
Slowing the photographic process is film’s single largest benefit. It is a fact that, for the vast majority of us, our on-hand supply of film is finite. This, in turn, causes us to think twice before we release the shutter. With digital, because of the economics of the “free photograph” we often find ourselves photographing scenes we wouldn’t usually be photographing or taking a photo just to take one. This is potentially problematic since studies have shown that taking photos can take you out of the present.
Because we are limited to the number of images on a roll of film and the number of rolls of film in our camera bags and the amount of cash we have with which to buy new film, when we shoot film, we have to be diligent regarding the images we capture. This drives a completely different approach to photography and photographic thinking—we look harder, notice more, see more, and remember more, because we are shooting less. For someone starting off in photography, there is no doubt that this can be of significant benefit (and also beneficial for veterans of the craft).
Which is Best?
There are certainly advantages to starting photography in both the digital and analog world, but I feel there is a great benefit to either starting with film, or using film simultaneously while shooting digital for new photographers.
Now that the table is set, please let us know what your thoughts are on this subject in the Comments section below. Thanks for reading!
