One Roll of Film

Since digital photography was introduced, our art has become available to most, for better or worse. Releasing a shutter doesn’t cost much anymore, the process of creating an image is easier than ever, and everyone who has a phone is now a photographer. In 2016, going back to film sounds like a crazy idea for many. However, like "One Roll of Film" shows, it still has its place, and it is different from digital.

The principle behind this short movie is quite simple. Four Tokyo-based photographers hit the streets of the city with just one roll of 120 film and a Hasselblad, meaning they had only 12 frames available — 12 attempts to create the best images possible, or at least an image worth printing.

It would be like shooting with a Nikon D810 and a 512 MB card (you read that right: MB, not GB). Most of these photographers used Hasselblad bodies that didn’t even have a metering prism. They had to rely on an ambient/flash meter to measure each scene.

Watching all of them trying so hard, taking the time to think so much beforehand, and not depending on post-processing at all made me reflect on the modern take most of us have on the art that is photography. I’ve heard instructors at workshops saying: "shoot as much as possible; this is digital, not film. It doesn’t cost a dime to shoot more!" But I was never convinced that it is the way to go. It’s just another manner of describing "spray and pray" without really admitting it.

Having started photography less than a decade ago, I have never shot film. However, seeing this video and talking with people that still do love their darkroom, it reminded me of my recent digital medium format experience: shooting more slowly, focusing manually, and thinking more about everything before pressing the shutter, because it’s a less versatile system than digital 35mm. I was quite bummed when I had to give my Phase One back. But after watching this video and reading Spencer Lookabaugh Five Reasons to Shoot Medium Format Film, I bought a Mamiya RB67 on eBay. I cannot wait to see how it compares to digital medium format, both in terms of experience and image quality.

What do you think of "One Roll of Film"? Does it make you rethink the way you shoot? Have you ever tried a "one roll" challenge? I would love to read your thoughts regarding film and the film approach in our digital photography era.

Quentin Decaillet's picture

Quentin Décaillet is a photographer and retoucher based in Switzerland specializing in portrait and wedding photography.

Log in or register to post comments
17 Comments

Timely article. I just ordered a used Nikon F80 film body off of eBay because I was feeling a bit "detached" I guess from the process. I'm looking forward to grabbing some ol' fashioned Tri-X and hitting the streets again like I did when I was in high school.

I was just doing this yesterday. I spent about two hours to get three shots (well, six shots of three scenes) on my Eastman 5x7 View Camera.

My dad shot with a Chinon SE-4 35mm back in the 70/80's and recently lent it to me. I took him up and shot a couple of Fuji Superia 400 rolls out of curiosity.. and was very pleased with the outcome.

To anyone who hasn't shot with film before... try shooting with 1 roll.. get it processed, then try a second roll. I think you'll 'develop' more of an appreciation for the time and cost around the developing process, I certainly did. Commit yourself to 36 exposures on a digital camera and shoot with a fixed ISO setting.

In November, I took the plunge and bought a Hasselblad 501CM. I absolutely adore this camera - it is such a pleasure to use and a brilliantly simple piece of equipment. I shot 35mm film as a teenager - but never very seriously. I only got into serious photography with digital.

I've seen this video before, and loved it. I rarely find 12 frames to be limiting - it actually feels about right to me in most cases. It does force you to slow down, but I find it to be less about the number of shots and more about not being able to see/delete shots as they are taken - I won't know until well after the moment if it turned out, so I need to hedge my bets and use the best technique and best framing possible in the moment.

Where I do find it limiting is in head shots/portraiture when I'm trying to get great natural expressions out of my model. In those cases I tend to shoot as much as possible, as the expression can look so drastically different from one second to the next. I don't even try any of my dance photography with it, so that's another limitation I suppose.

As for image quality, thus far it has been worse when it comes to resolution and sharpness compared to my DSLR (partially my technique, partially the films I use, partially my scanning). I haven't been able to produce the same tonal quality digitally as the film does though, and that really adds a lot of character to the shot in my opinion. I continue to shoot both film and digital; each is an excellent tool to have in one's quiver.

Hi Quentin, thanks for sharing this.

Please keep us updated on your experience with medium format film. It's a path I often think about going down. In particular I'd be interested in how you feel about the output you get from medium format film. Recently The Online Photographer posted an article in which an experienced print maker opined that he was able to make "better" prints from images captured on a 6 year old 12 mega-pixel four-thirds sensor than anything he ever got from medium format film http://tinyurl.com/hlo3nyk.

It has me wondering (as someone like you who's really only shot digital) if I'm already so spoiled by digital that the image quality of film (to say nothing of the feel) would seem like a step backwards. On the other hand, are we so far past the point where it's worth worrying about the technical "quality" of the output, that it doesn't matter what you use to capture the image because the viewing audience can't spot the difference (or at least doesn't care about the difference) between something shot on film, the same thing shot on a camera phone and the same thing shoot on the latest Phase One.

I'll probably write a few articles sharing my experiences when I start shooting with film. I believe I won't be the only writer doing so (check Spencer Lookabaugh articles ;) ). I can't wait to see how it compares to the D810, D750 and also to the Phase One IQ250! :)

I tend to go out and practice with set limits on my dSLR, such as a single lens (usually a prime), limited exposures (12 or 36), no chimping (cover the rear LCD) and so on then find a suitable subject such as street photography, portrait sessions or even do a theme. I find this way of shooting great tool for teaching discipline and learning to read exposures on the fly.

This said I am hankering to buy a medium format body or a TLR to shoot some film in the future.

Great Article, makes me want to dust off my Minolta and buy a roll of film.

Right there with you. I actually put my photo business on hiatus for the year in order to realign my photographic journey, so I've been shooting and developing my own B&W for the past few weeks. The process really helps me focus on what I find to be worth the mental (and monetary) investment. I graduated not too long ago and I cannot tell you how many times I've heard "just take your digital out and shoot whenever you can" from my professors. While digital is a fantastic (and wallet-friendly) option to discover personal shooting style, I find that film teaches me aim and precision with more usable images in the long run.

That "One roll of film" video was so bad. The idea was great, but we barely see the outcome, the camera kept swerving... Not a great edit.

Cool post though!

I started with film. I still shoot this way on digital. Maybe I miss out on a shot here or there, but I like approaching each press of the shutter with great intention. Every few months, I'll shoot a couple rolls of film... I think it helps me to stay in the moment.

I don't think that's fair at all. Digital gives you the freedom to many things that were simply impractical or even impossible with film. It doesn't mean that everybody takes advantage of them or abuses them, but simply by being there they do absolutely influence the way people use the tools.

i think that's an overly simplistic view.

I started photography seriously in 2007 with digital. In 2011 I picked up a Rolleiflex and it was the best thing that ever happened to my photography. I slowed down, became conscious of more shots, and I have appreciated that ever since.

I love shooting film and do it almost daily still. One of my favorite camera purchases was my Mamiya 645 I bought almost 10 years ago now.

I think I've seen the Hasselbad "One Roll of Film" before. I would love to have the opportunity to shoot medium format film; Hasselblad wouldn't be the brand since their prices on the used market are outrageous.
I've got two 35mm film cameras; one is loaded with B&W and the other with color. My other camera shoots ones and zeros.

I didn't note all the DigitalRev points, but I can agree with points of the "Then" and "Now". So why is MF "Now"?

I work in a secondary school and run a Photography workshop. One of the kids who comes doesn't own a camera and hasn't really done any photography, but she comes twice a week to spend her breaktimes there. I decided to lend her an old automatic film camera (Canonet) with a roll of film to see what she could do ... see what it is she sees. No fancy techniques required as it's an automatic camera, so it was just to see what she sees. The results, along with her explanations of what she shot and why, were really interesting. As well as being only one roll of film, it was her first ever roll of film, her first ever photographs with a camera not part of a mobile phone. They're on a school trip to Portugal (I live in Spain) this week and I've given her the camera and another roll of film ...

This, and this video, have just made me go out and buy a roll for my 35mm SLR ... my first roll in a few months. Thanks for sharing the video.