No, I'm not doing any technical comparison or any film vs digital debate.
Being a "digital" only photographer, I was curious on the hoo-haa by film advocates & proponents, even saying digital shots are "soul-less". My thoughts after the jump.
So I loaned 2 film bodies from a friend, an Olympus 35RD rangefinder & a Canon EOS 5 and bought a bunch of film. It's a little wierd not being able "chimp" as one would normally do in digital. With the Olympus a manual rangefinder, I had to carry around a lightmeter, instead I took along a small digital point and shoot
It was refreshing to slowdown a little and actually carry smaller cameras around instead of the huge hunks of metal I am used to.
So how are the results? Pleasantly surprised. Although I still prefer digital at the end of the day, I am intrigued by the results I have gotten. The Fuji slide film are wonderfully crisp & saturated, while the b&w is just plain fun, and "artistic".
Seeing odd random grain is definitely more interesting than the monochromatic noise and the random color dots of digital. This is what I think everyone says it has more "soul" and organic. Can it be replicated in digital? I probably think so, to a certain extent.
Personally, I think all photographer SHOULD at least once shoot film just to see how it turns out in a slide. It's really, really Cool (this is the only word I can think of)
I'll be messing around with Medium/large format soon! Now that should be even more fun.
Thinking back, would I have the same level of interest if it was film photography instead of digital? I think I would, but I won't be able to have improved at my current rate due to film & processing costs (the average cost including of scanning are around USD25 per roll)
Below are some selected shots from the 2 rolls I have just shot.
no comments