Does shooting film really improve your photography?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 21335
  • Start date Start date
garry71 said:
Wonder if they had this debate in ye olden tymes when 35mm roll film came out?

It must have been better to learn on single glass plates, instead of the machine gun approach of getting through a roll of film and keeping the best ones.
Using a glass plate makes you slow down, and think about each shot before you take it.
Click to expand...

They did indeed ... but it started between plates and roll film.
and later the argument continued between medium format and 35mm.
 
Ed Sutton said:
That depends where you're looking. If you only look at photographs by people who are 'into' photography, then probably.

If you look at photos taken by people who own cameras, then no. Those people just take more rubbish photos than they used to. ;)
Click to expand...

Don't knock family snaps and camera phone efforts. The "quality" coming out of them is far better than most people used to get from films at the chemist.
What they shoot is not rubbish to them. What "Serious Photographer" shoots has no meaning to the lives of the snap shotter.
 
Siilver said:
You want to know what will improve your photography?

Get of this site and every other site, pick up your camera and start click
Fill up memory cards or rolls of film
That will get you better at some stage
Click to expand...

:clap:

Read, play & absorb :D
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Don't knock family snaps and camera phone efforts. The "quality" coming out of them is far better than most people used to get from films at the chemist.
What they shoot is not rubbish to them. What "Serious Photographer" shoots has no meaning to the lives of the snap shotter.
Click to expand...

I'm not knocking family snaps.

I'm saying that despite the technology built into cameras these days there are still plenty of badly exposed and out of focus shots being taken. The good thing about digital is that even jpegs can be 'saved' more easily than prints or slides can.
 
Some really interesting points on the original question. Some think it has it's advantages, some don't. Aside from whether it will improve my photography or not, one of the reasons I want to have a go, particularly with MF, is they just seem a pleasure to hold/set/use.
 
Then go out buy a cheap slr buy film, send the film of for development or do it yourself, I'm sure it won't break the bank
 
I've come round to the idea that snapz are actually what cameras are for.
Everything else is an afterthought.
 
Gazmorton 2000, you should get a medium format camera and give it a go, you can get a twin lens reflex 6x6 for under £100 and pick up some film from 7dayshop. I loved using medium format (though light metering was a pain at first). If you dont like it you will most likely be able to sell it on again.
 
Nguss said:
Gazmorton 2000, you should get a medium format camera and give it a go, you can get a twin lens reflex 6x6 for under £100 and pick up some film from 7dayshop. I loved using medium format (though light metering was a pain at first). If you dont like it you will most likely be able to sell it on again.
Click to expand...

So £100 plus film plus developing plus scanner - pretty expensive when it's not going to teach you anything that you can't do with digital. While I do think certain looks can't be achieved with digital over some films it's not going to be really worthwhile
 
So I have been playing with a film rangefinder for the last few weeks. I think I have gained something worthwhile from the time.

• I have learnt a lot about the interplay between shutter speed, aperture and film speed.

• I've been forced to use a lightmeter app on my iPhone and I am now much more aware of the light conditions while I am shooting. A passing cloud now cues me to stop, think, re meter. I also find myself waiting for the right light when using my dslr now.

• working with a clunky dual curtain shutter has made me much more conscious of holding cameras correctly. There is no Image stabilisation on film, need to watch my shutter speeds as well

• having dof marked on the lens has made me far more aware of how aperture effects things.

.
 
You could have done all that on a digital (bar the dof marking on lens as not many have that now)

Put the camera in manual, turn off IS, used fixed ISO and it is just the same. And turn off the rear screen to stop review off setting, images etc,.
 
I have recently bought some old and not so old 35mms. Mainly use digital but gradually using the old ones too. I am learning a bit, mainly through slowing down and being more aware. Mostly I like the feel and challenge of the rangefinders and playing with different SLRs that were once $500 but cost me $10 or less. I have some 5 and 6 MP SLRs and compacts for fun, too.
 
POAH said:
So £100 plus film plus developing plus scanner - pretty expensive when it's not going to teach you anything that you can't do with digital. While I do think certain looks can't be achieved with digital over some films it's not going to be really worthwhile
Click to expand...

I see what you say, but I understood that the purpose of getting one for the poster was to try it as opposed to learning anything.

I totally agree that most likely you won't learn anything new with film that you can't learn with digital (and most likely quicker with digital because of the instant feedback) but if the purpose is to try something new as opposed to learning something new...you only live once and the price of a camera a few rolls of film and having it scanned by the lab will still be generally cheaper than a new lens for your existing camera.
 
Well the title is more about whether you learn anything but the comments in the post were more about just trying it.

Agree though, why not try it as it doesn't exactly cost much and gives you another experience. I did just that a few months ago and while the film and development cost me around £30 I made a profit on both cameras that I bought :) (OM10 and Trip)
 
yes,unlike digital you have to get it right first time.

it slows you down,makes you think about what you are doing.

you have to process and print yourself though to get the best.
 
straycat said:
it slows you down,makes you think about what you are doing.
Click to expand...

Why do you need to be forced to think? Can you not think without being made to do so?

If being made to slow down makes you think, couldn't you acheive the same effect by wearing boxing gloves?
 
Last edited:
Some people need to be forced to think. Those same people seem to think that everyone is the same as them. They have probably been forced to think like that :)
 
ernesto said:
Well the title is more about whether you learn anything but the comments in the post were more about just trying it.
Click to expand...

Yes, the title was based on what I have read from a few people more wise than me in the photographic world, so that was indeed my initial question. Does it really help you improve? I personally think I am someone who would benefit from being forced to slow down and think, but yes, one of the reasons I am thinking about it, is the pleasure I find from holding/using a manual film camera.
 
Everyone is different so not sure one answer applies. It definitely slows you down, to the point where you can't remember what you did when you took each photo as they are developed a week or two later when the roll is used up!

I found that I got the same results as when using digital (not a higher number of better shots) as I am still very much learning so most of my shots are still experimenting with what looks good and why. I am not someone who ever sprays and prays though and I will usually take just one or two shots and then move on to next thing to photograph.
 
ernesto said:
You could have done all that on a digital (bar the dof marking on lens as not many have that now)

Put the camera in manual, turn off IS, used fixed ISO and it is just the same. And turn off the rear screen to stop review off setting, images etc,.
Click to expand...

yes, I suspect that had someone suggested those steps it would have been great, especially if they had been available to guide me along so I learnt useful lessons from those self imposed shackles.

Maybe I would put it this way, yes it is useful in the same way that knowing how to drive a manual shift car is useful even if you are planning to always drive automatics...
 
straycat said:
yes,unlike digital you have to get it right first time.

it slows you down,makes you think about what you are doing.

you have to process and print yourself though to get the best.
Click to expand...

I think you have it in one,it's the same as medium format in film days because there is a cost associated with pressing the shutter you slow down and think more before you take the shot.Hopefully that process is translated when you pick up your DSLR
 
Being forced to take less shots, think about them more, spend more time unfortunately doesn't mean they will always be good. Better to have 2 or 3 on digital to increase the chances and reduce amount of time wasted.
 
I think it's best to start by saying I believe everyone is different and people learn in different ways.

I love taking photographs, with any camera. I use digital, 35mm film, a compact and a phone. Really looking forward to getting a MF film camera in a few months time.

If I'm in the right frame of mind, I learn with every picture I take, regardless of camera.

I learned the technical side with digital, and that's definitely a better way to go than film, for me.

Having reached a reasonable level of technical competence I find that film helps me to better develop my awareness of light and tone, as well as compositional skills.

I've still got a way to go with those but, again for me, film seems to be the best medium to develop those areas.

I don't really know why - not sure I'm bothered - it's just what works for me.

Find what works for you, but at least give film a go.
 
I agree wizmat! Do one better calculate the EV from that the exposure and go manual focus. Do Not use the LCD or histogram! make a note, yup pen and paper, of the EV and exposure and shot number and see what you have achieved when you get back to the PC! Believe me its fun :)
 
I personally found that film enabled me to understand the concept of working with light much more effectively & I found it much more explained if something went wrong & how it did. It's different for everyone but I'd never toss the idea of trying something different out the window over any quality prohibitions you may have. Film is a wonderful process & can be fun to do as well as a learning curve. I shoot & develop my own black & white film for my own amusement.
 
Last edited:
Each technology has its time and place. I use both for pleasure not because one teaches me more than the other because it does not. I use the same technique whatever camera I am using. I am still careful and I am still watching my exposure and still pay attention to my composition, framing and all of necessary parameters.

It reminds me of the argument "who is the better driver the person with manual gear or the one with automatic gear?"

YMMV
 
I used film for 20 years and I'm still not a brilliant photographer! Does that prove anything?
 
Phil V said:
I used film for 20 years and I'm still not a brilliant photographer! Does that prove anything?
Click to expand...

just think how bad you could have been without that 20 years of film :)
 
Blimey..

If you want to shoot some film, shoot some film, you don't need to qualify that with excuses or suggestions it may help you with your digital photography, just get on and do it.

When you've shot some and had time to digest the situation, the classifieds are here and the film section is here...

happy days..:cool:
 
ernesto said:
It made no difference to me when I dabbled in film a few months back. I took less shots but they were certainly no better.
I am still very much learning when it comes to achieving interesting subjects with good composition and using film just slows down the learning process (a lot!)
Click to expand...

I started with film cameras eventually working up to a full SLR before moving to digital. Looking back now the biggest lesson I brought with me from the film days was exactly the subject and composition element of taking a picture.

If you go to a location then with digital you can just take shots from all sorts of angles and worry about which ones work when you get back to the computer. Maybe none of them will work, no bother, you lost nothing.

With film you can still do that but you quickly learn to "edit" the shots before taking them to save film or money. In time you learn to survey the location without ever taking the camera out to find the one or two really good spots and angles worth taking a picture from.

Learning to to that surveying was the trick for me. It saves time, it makes me look more and it led on to really really looking a scene to find that composition I wanted in the light I wanted. At times it sees me walk away from places that I just can't "see" rather than taking pictures for the sake of it but at other times it pushes me to interesting setups that I might not otherwise have tried.

I do wonder if I'd have learned that surveying trick without the film background.
 
Do this mean if you have grown up with digital your not a good photographer?
And if you shoot film your brilliant ?

If you want to take your time, you will doesn't matter what you shoot on
Depends on the person
 
Liam O'Neill said:
With film you can still do that but you quickly learn to "edit" the shots before taking them to save film or money. In time you learn to survey the location without ever taking the camera out to find the one or two really good spots and angles worth taking a picture from.
Click to expand...

Another interpretation is that the restrictions of film mean that you get used to only picking the shots that will definitely work as you can't afford the extra time and money to try exprimentating.
 
Siilver said:
Do this mean if you have grown up with digital your not a good photographer?
And if you shoot film your brilliant ?

YEP!!:p

If you want to take your time, you will doesn't matter what you shoot on
Depends on the person
Click to expand...

Very true!

The following is just my (SUBJECTIVE) take on it so please take it as such...

When I started photography there was no digital so yes, every frame had to work.

Also, the very high level of electronic gadgetry found in every digital camera nowadays is very intimidating for anyone except the toughest anoraks.

This does complicate matters a bit for a complete novice who wants to learn photography.

I reckon anyone wanting to learn the basics would do well to find an old Pentax K-1000 or similar and burn a few rolls through it.

All the (very limited) controls are open and visible and once the basic foundation is laid it is so much easier to negotiate contemporary D-SLR cameras with more confidence.

Fortunately film is still very cheap down here and so I can play plenty...if only I could find the time:bang:

IF the film bug bites, do look for a nice MF (645 or 67 maybe) camera or go large format 4 x 5 if it is affordable.

There is that something about film that is just magical but if it doesn't bite don't worry about it...enjoy photography regardless of what you shoot with!
 
hollis_f said:
Another interpretation is that the restrictions of film mean that you get used to only picking the shots that will definitely work as you can't afford the extra time and money to try exprimentating.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Shooting film can become limiting. I found the freedom of digital a breath of fresh and started taking more shots than I had done previously, I just coupled with this attitude of finding the best shots before taking the camera out. I'd take digital and it's "free" pictures and instant feedback over film every day.

The benefit, for me, of this habit of studying a location and seeing it without the camera is that now it encourages me to experiment more, to really imagine what the best shots might be and if they look like they work focusing in on those, even if it means climbing over another rock or getting my feet wet in the water (within reason) If that's where my eye is telling me the shot is then that's where I'll want to be.
If I fire off 50 shots from 10 different spots in the place and wait until I get home to find the "best" one then I see myself just picking the 10 easy-to-get-to spots and sticking with them instead.

I still take pictures that don't work, lots of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top