Film photography has seen a resurgence in recent years, captivating many enthusiasts with its authenticity. Exploring this trend reveals the nuances of film versus digital and why both have their place in today's photography landscape.
Coming to you from Alex Kilbee with The Photographic Eye, this enlightening video dives into the essence of film photography. Kilbee starts by reminiscing about the dominance of film until digital cameras took over in 2008. He contrasts the tactile, hands-on nature of film with the convenience of digital. It helps highlight why film can feel more genuine, engaging you in every step of the process.
Kilbee uses a charming analogy with handmade and mass-produced items to illustrate his point. A handcrafted elephant figurine, with its unique imperfections, feels authentic compared to a mass-produced equivalent. This analogy extends to photography, where film offers a tactile, deliberate experience. He shares his personal journey, from learning film in school to embracing digital’s convenience. Kilbee acknowledges that digital's ease can sometimes detach you from the creative process, making film's slower, more involved approach appealing.
He discusses his Canon A1 film camera and the detailed process of developing and printing photos by hand. This contrasts sharply with the efficiency of digital, where images are quickly edited and printed. Kilbee emphasizes that neither medium is inherently more authentic; instead, authenticity comes from the photographer's intent and engagement.
Kilbee also explores how digital photography has evolved. Initially skeptical, he embraced tools like Photoshop, which opened new creative possibilities. However, he felt something was lost as the process became more digital. A poignant moment at the Golden Gate Bridge highlighted this for him. Seeing a young photographer using film reminded Kilbee of the value of slowing down and connecting with the act of taking photos. The conversation revealed a shared desire to break free from the rapid pace of digital creation.
The video further discusses the balance between film and digital. Kilbee appreciates digital's technical advancements, making photography accessible and versatile. Yet, he advocates for film as a means to reconnect with the craft. For him, film’s cost and effort make each shot more deliberate and meaningful. This slow, intentional approach contrasts with digital’s immediacy, fostering a deeper connection with the subject. Check out the video above for the full rundown from Kilbee.
If it matters to you then it matters. If it doesn’t matter to you then it doesn’t matter.
I've never really thought of film as being desirable because it was "real". I always thought, "well I can replicate the effect digitally just as well and also have a better final product." Now that everything can be created with Ai, there is something about a raw digital negative that does seem to hold some intrigue more than just the aesthetics of the image. It's an interesting way to think about it.
Do our customers really care how we make an image? Has anyone asked you whether you use a film or digital camera, or which brand, or how many megapixels you’ve got? Unfortunately they might not even begin to care whether it’s made with a camera or an AI creation. This whole concept of authenticity only really matters to the artist himself. It matters to those of us trying to adapt to an ever changing world where the old established ways of doing things are getting turned upside down. And that’s uncomfortable for many of us. I often sense a little bit of mini mid-life crisis in Alex’s videos. I suppose that’s why I enjoy them so much.
Speaking of authenticity... of all the elements of Alex's photography that are discussed in the video, sending digital images out to a photo lab seems like the least authentic. I don't think of technology itself as more or less authentic. After all, aren't we just comparing film to memory cards, or trays full of chemicals to ink in an electronic printer? They're all simply a means to an end. Where I find the most authenticity in my work is making my own prints. That's the stage where my work comes alive. Until then, whether film or digital, it's just a thought. So how can we claim our work to be a unique reflection of ourselves as a photographer when handing off the finished product to a lab?
One more thing... the digital process is not necessarily one mindless button pushing exercise after another. Every last detail in my inkjet prints is crafted with as much thought as film photographers do in the darkroom. I just use different tools to control those details. I'm sure I take as much pride in watching my prints roll out of the printer as the darkroom photographer does watching prints emerge magically from a tray of chemicals. Of course the cost of film motivates one to slow down and take a more deliberative approach to photography, but I suspect it also restricts creativity. The creative mind embraces mistakes. I wouldn't buy a package of 4*5 sheets of film and go blow them off in a series of creative experiments.