You’re Making a Mistake if You’re Not Telling Your Friends to Start With Film

You’re Making a Mistake if You’re Not Telling Your Friends to Start With Film

Photography is a dream job for many, and everyone thinks we’re so lucky to do it. To that extent, they also all “would love to get more into photography.” While we get pretty good at sifting out which of our friends are actually serious about that goal, here are a few suggestions for how to get over the biggest barrier to entry by starting with film.

Sure, we’re well into the 21st century. As such, digital photography is something we all immediately assume. But getting a digital camera isn’t necessarily the easiest (i.e. cheapest) way to start, even if it’s cheaper in the long run. However, our friends don't often get to see the long run if they don't stick with photography, because they never get truly inspired. Many of us — myself included — recommend to friends to just go out and buy the cheapest camera they can and start shooting. Or even use their iPhone. But those options often set people up for failure.

Shot on Kodak Tri-X

The Problem With Digital

The biggest barrier to entry with actually getting into photography as a hobby (or more) is not the picture-taking itself. My public relations specialist sister takes more pictures in a single night out with her friends than I do all month. Photo-taking is not her problem. Her problem in getting truly inspired by her own photography is in the lack of quality (no offense to her: I'll explain soon). And this is where beginners struggle when it comes to digital photography.

Where digital photography shines is when you know how to edit. Digital sensors capture all this incredible detail in a raw file and let you pull out amazing color on demand. But to do this, you have to spend at least 10 minutes connecting your camera, importing your images to your computer, loading them into Lightroom (assuming you already know how to use it or are good with figuring out software on your own, which isn’t common with many photographers who are just starting out), and then have to spend at least 30 minutes to an hour editing a shoot (we’re working quickly, here), all while naturally knowing what your photos need — which you know because you’ve edited so many photos before, right? Not for your friends.

Shot on Kodak Ektar 100

Instead, beginners blow over $500 on a starter DSLR setup and publish the most flat, boring, tungsten-light-muddled images onto their Instagram feeds. Maybe they even wonder why their images don’t look so amazing and add filters on top of their images, bringing them down to the level they were already at with their phones anyway.

The Film Solution

Film has a multitude of advantages for anyone starting out. But first, let’s get the bad out of the way. Of course, you have to expose your photos pretty well. This isn’t that different than shooting digital for those just starting out, because you likely won’t have that much exposure latitude with a cheap digital camera anyway. But it’s still something to think about. Also, shooting film does require buying the film and processing and scanning services. But the pros outweigh this con for beginners (more on this later). And that’s about it.

The great thing about starting with film is that the color work is done for you. You choose a film based on what you think looks nice (there are countless examples online if you need them), and the processing and scanning work provides a file that needs all of zero minutes of work before you’re ready to post on the ol’ IG. Each and every time, as long as you have a decent exposure, your friends will be thrilled with the results — shocked, in fact. They will still need to train themselves in finding compositions that are interesting to the eye, but the color work — one of the hardest parts of photography — will be completely taken care of.

Shot on Kodak Ektar 100

Additionally, film photography is easier than people think. I see this all the time: so many people want to try film, but are afraid because “it’s hard.” However, this thinking is simply naive and stems from the feeling of actually messing up a tangible, finite resource: the film. But messing up a frame — or even an entire roll — just doesn’t happen that often. Will it happen more in the beginning? Sure. But this fear that you will mess up 90 percent of your first images on film is completely misguided. You and your friends will be absolutely fine — happier, in fact, since the images you do get will all be so much better than those your other friends get back from their digital cameras and don’t yet know how to edit. Be sure to get a camera kit that has some kind of built-in meter (it’s just easier to start with) or learn more about the Sunny 16 Rule. But that should be all you and your friends need to start shooting film successfully.

Amazingly, shooting film actually cuts down on waste. Forget about “slowing down” because you’re shooting film. Sure, you do slow down a bit. But the best part about this is that you are simply being more selective in your choice of captured images. You won’t rattle off six needless copies of the same shot that you end up hating because you’re testing your camera’s maximum rate of fire. And in the end, you’ll find those film shots are 90 percent keepers (likely up from 10 percent with digital).

Shot on Kodak Portra 800

Finally, while some are worried about the cost of film, film photography is actually cheaper for beginners. A $400-$600 digital camera setup is still a chunk to put down up front — and all for a starter APS-C camera and kit lens. A film camera, on the other hand, can be had for anywhere from $100 to absolutely free depending on what bargain hunting you do on Craigslist, at thrift shops, or through eBay. Odds are one of your friend’s grandparents even has an old camera they can use. Just $15 more gets you your first roll of film, processing, and scanning. So for an average of probably $50 or so, you can help your friend get amazing results that will entice them to get more into photography as opposed to mediocre results that will have them regretting their $500 DSLR purchase.

Yes, it might have seemed odd to present the idea of starting with film in 2019. But with better color, a more affordable barrier to entry, and the general satisfaction of doing it the “real way,” shooting film will give your friends the best chance of actually falling in love with photography, and not being intimidated by it if you can get them over the first hump.

Shot on Kodak Tri-X

Quick Film Gear Tips for Beginners

  1. Get a simple and affordable camera with a built-in meter to start. People talk about the popular Canon AE-1 or Nikon FG (which I started with in 7th Grade), but plenty of Pentax (like the K1000) and Minolta cameras out there are just as good and can often be had for less. But you can find a steal of a deal on any of these if you look around a bit.
  2. Don't worry about big zoom or telephoto lenses. Start with a simple 50mm lens with an f/1.8 or f/2 aperture. Even an f/2.8 aperture is fine, but all of these should be fairly affordable. You can likely get the best deal by going for a kit, where the body and lens are included together (in which case, don't worry so much about which lens to start with — just get out and shoot).
  3. If you want to get more into film and are looking to move beyond 35mm, look into buying an affordable medium-format camera such as the incredible Mamiya M645, or even rent one if you're not sure yet.
  4. Start with affordable film, but stay away from film that expired a long time ago if you're just starting, as you likely won't get consistent results. You can get a ton of deals on film on eBay (try for $3 per roll or less) for films like Kodak Ultramax, Kodak ColorPlus, Fujicolor C200, or even Lomography and black and white films.
  5. Find affordable processing, and don't be afraid to mail your film out. I run Film Objektiv, which also offers only high-quality scans, but at a good price. But we also have a Film Processing Price Comparison Chart for the U.S. that we highly recommend using to see what's in your area.

Have additional questions about getting started with film? Ask away below!

Adam Ottke's picture

Adam works mostly across California on all things photography and art. He can be found at the best local coffee shops, at home scanning film in for hours, or out and about shooting his next assignment. Want to talk about gear? Want to work on a project together? Have an idea for Fstoppers? Get in touch! And, check out FilmObjektiv.org film rentals!

Log in or register to post comments
128 Comments
Previous comments

"The cosplay aspect of shooting film..." F@cking love it! Well said, Tanaka.

I started with film, pre-digital. And taught others to do it. And no, it is NOT better to start folks with film these days.

Basically the author seems to think there's something special about film snapshots; there isn't. His workflow: snapping without light meter, auto processing and "printing or scanning, is basically what everyone did with their Instamatics back in the day. And no more of them graduated to SLRs or to doing their own darkroom work than now graduate from smartphones to DSLRs. In fact, I bet more move on. Why? because contrary to the editor's assumptions most smartphone users that have come into our club already post process in apps. Or online. You had no leeway to do that with film snapshotting back in the day. None. Can't even crop. (And BTW, my club is mostly seniors, so not exactly the snapchat generation. None want to do film again, even though they have.)

Part of success in photography is in getting an eye for what is good. My instructors were always hammering at us to shoot more, do brackets, take chances. And that's far easier with digital.

Doesn't make any sense to me. If you seriously want to learn how exposure works - sensitivity, aperture, exposure time - a digital camera will help you to get these right much quicker than film any day, simply because you can compare your pictures to the scene right there, instead of having to wait for your pictures to be developed. You want to have more business, or stay in it at all? You'd rather encourage people to get a digital camera with interchangeable lenses, play around with them, not be afraid of manual focus lenses, and then they're ripe to make the best of film photography.
Don't get me wrong, I love film photography. I did a bit of it before digicams became a widespread option, but started getting really interesting in photography with digital cameras. Then I started toying around with vintage lenses, and quickly enough I felt like trying the cameras that came with them. I ended up liking them and using them a lot, but I do not think I would have gotten results I am happy with so quickly had I not had built up experience with digital cameras.

This is the dumbest article I have seen so far today. Congratulations, you take the cake. I will now instruct everyone in my town to start with film. Where will they get film? Have to drive 6 hours one way I guess. That should really slow them down. How to develop it? Guess they will have to send it out in the mail, that should really slow them down. Hopefully starting with film will slow them down so much they give up and just keep using their phones. That was the point of this article right?

SO DAMN MORONIC.

I started on film, in a darkroom because my high school gave me that option. I will also say I spent more on film, paper, and chemicals than I have on all my digital gear combined.

This article is completely stupid from a "writer" that is so insulated from reality, I think he actually believes this useless dribble he spouts.

This conglomeration of text (I cant call it an article), should never have been posted. FStoppers should be appalled to post such crap as this. And I am not saying this because I hate film. I actually love film, and long for the day I can have a darkroom again, just because I love the process. But 100% of what was said here is absolute BULLSHIT.

As a motorcycle instructor, we put students on the smallest, easiest bikes to start. It lets them make all the mistakes they need in a relatively safe environment. 125cc four-stroke machines. I'd never put my brand new student on an old 400cc two-strike from the 70's, that would be a disservice to them and would likely result in them learning bad habits, if not make them unsafe or give up entirely.

I have a 400cc 2-stroke from the 80's my middle son just got his bike license and he's not going near it. Not because it's a smelly thing with a power band as wide as a gnat's scrotum. IT'S MY BIKE AND HE'S NOT TOUCHING IT ;)

"He can be found at the best local coffee shops, at home scanning film in for hours…” Wow! He sure sounds like a hipster. He frequents only the "best" local coffee shops in his gentrified neighborhood...and say what, he spends hours scanning film at home? Ok. So that explains his absurd blog post.

F-stoppers probably has an army of unpaid writers who specialize in click-bait material. The writer sure seems one of them.

Sure go ahead Adam, work with film all you want. But for the love of Gumby stop telling people that they are making a mistake if they don’t tell their friends to start in film. What an absurd article! And what insane reasoning!

Each photo that is used in the article has something that would not have happened if it was shot raw digital. The shadows are too closed down. There is horrible dirt hits in the "Shot on Portra 800" sunset shot. There is lint in the cable car shot. The scans are terrible. Yup! I guess that is the joy of film. By the end of the article you discover that Adam is promoting his own film-scanning service. No thanks Adam. If I wanted dirt hits or lint in my scans, I will do them myself.

I’ve been shooting every format of film for over 45 years. My main format is 8x10. I have shot digital for the last 25 years, primarily with Hasselblads. It would not occur to me to suggest to my friends to start in film. They don't have to start with Hasselblads. But they don't have to live with crappy, dark film scans with lint in them.

I teach photography at an art school in the south and I get this same attitude from other faculty every day: “Students need to start out in film” before they can move to digital. I know teachers who *forbid* their students from touching digital. Why?

That mindset is more often than not a result of two kinds of thinking:

1. The older generation that shot/taught film and got outmoded by digital and have no comprehension of it or have any facility with it. Read the comment by Timothy Gasper above and you will see what I mean. He seems to have lost his will to live due to the advent of digital photography. I'll bet any amount of money Ole Timothy has never touched Lightroom or Photoshop.

2. Hipsters who spend far too much time in the “best” local coffee shops and far too many hours scanning film at home. They also run their own scanning service that they would like to promote by guilting you into telling your friends to start in digital. (They need the money)

I dare anyone to show me that film is cheaper than digital. In fact I will bet the opposite is true.

I dare anyone to show me film shooters are better at composition.

I dare anyone to show me film is "superior" to digital, and not simply an aesthetic choice.

I dare anyone to show me, as the author says, that shooting with film gives people the “general satisfaction of doing it the “real way” “

I dare anyone to show me that somehow shooting with digital is less “real.”

I dare you. I double dare you. I triple-dog dare you. I quadruple kitty-cat dare you.

I agree, the photos he chose to show, I would cull out and no one would ever see. Good thing he slowed down for the composition though... Most of them seem blurry or out of focus anyway, either from scanning or from shooting. This is what happens when you make excuses for the shortcomings you have made, either through equipment or ignorance, and you just want to like it so you come up with reasons why the faults are actually benefits.

If any single one of those photos was on a critique the community, they would ALL be 1 star images. Maybe the fish would get 2 stars, but that would be pushing it.

"quadruple kitty-cat dare you" yikes, this guy is serious...

Anything that takes THAT much rationalization is wrong.

im making sure im a good friend by telling to not touch film.

Instant feedback is a great help to newbies - they can learn exactly what they did - if you shoot film, you don't see your results until the film is developed (and negative film is almost too forgiving) and scanned/printed - with digital, you see what you have and can immediately change your exposure, meter differently, etc. "Oh, the flash exposure is too much, let's drop power, close the aperture"

I think that only those who started on film can truly marvel at the instant feedback of digital. Fine point: especially for those learning.

I shoot film (and of course digital) for a number of reasons, but would not recommend to a newbie shooting film for the exact reason you highlighted.

"You're making a mistake if you don't tell your friends to take their first airline trip on a biplane."
"You're making a mistake if you don't tell your friends to adopt a wolf as their first dog."
"You're making a mistake if you don't tell your friends to only hunt and eat food caught with spears."
"You're making a mistake if you don't tell your friends to first learn to drive with a horse and buggy."
"You're making a mistake if you don't tell your friends to write their nonsensical words on paper and NEVER POST THEM ONLINE EVER AGAIN."

Thank you Logan (and most other commenters) for a truly entertaining set of replies to the silly premise in this article. I was thinking especially of your horse and buggy analogy since my teenage daughter started Driver's Ed...at no time did they try to teach her to harness a horse to a wagon.
This "learn film first" way of thinking is just plain wrong.

I do agree that people should use film if they want to, but not because they'll receive any special benefit from it. In fact, if the goal is to wind up with something to post online anyways, as the author suggests, starting with film is totally pointless.

Just wanabe hipsters trying to find a way to be different

Heh, heh...in that case there's always growing a beard and wearing wool hats in the summer.

Why would you assume someone is trying to be hip or cool if they shoot film. Can't they just like it without all the judgment? I mean, who are you? What do you like? What if people said the reason you like the things you do is only because you want to be cool or hip. Choose positivity first, bro. It's free and makes the world better.

If they are telling everyone it is a mistake to start new shooters with digital and instead tell them to start in film, while being “found at the best local coffee shops,” then yea, hipster alert for sure.

Unclench and give peace a chance, broseph!

No war needed, just spittin facts. If I offended you I appologize, I will buy you a fat free no soy mochawrapachino next I am in portland.

Sorry Adam but this is somewhere between poppycock and balderdash. Honestly, it is. Folks should start with what they have available and move from it only after they both feel comfortable and become curious. I will bet you that for most folks that starting point would be their phone. Or try this approach... there was a time when we didn't let students touch a camera for the first three semesters as they learned optics, theory and chemistry. At that time, the feeling was that using a 'small' camera would be too difficult for students to properly assess composition so they started with 4x5 cameras (usually a Speed Graphic, Crown Graphic or Busch Pressman D) and Durst or Beseler 45 enlargers. And then they started ferrotyping their prints. Students went to 35mm from 4x5. After the 35mm revolution in the mid to late 1970's students started with 35mm but just about everything else remained the same. Oh, usually students didn't touch color film until their senior year. All I can say is thank God those days are long, long behind us.

Nope. Let's just stop wasting natural resources to shoot film.

Also, stop buying overpriced vinyl records. They do not sound any better.

P.S. Get off my lawn.

Nicer to DJ with though.

You forgot to tell him to pull up his pants

And stop using that dirty paper stuff to pay for your coffee already! You're holding up the line.

So chasing GAS and buying digital equipment, filling landfills with unwanted "old tech' is somehow better than me using a camera made 40-years ago, that is not in a landfill. You realize the amount of waste and pollution that goes into extracting the raw materials to make the "cool new camera" to appease your digital GAS is exceptionally worse than reusing exiting film camera stock, yeah? Your logic is flawed, homeslice.

Why do you think that you have to buy new cameras all the time to shoot digital? That is your perception, not reality. Or it is some sort of straw man argument you are trying to make because you are not intelligent to win an argument on your own merits, so you have to contort what others say to try and vilify them.

Did anyone say anything about GAS? Did anyone say anything about buying the newest camera body all the time? NO. YOU did. Only you. You made your own counterpoint to counter because you don't have a real argument.

I like film, so I won't tag on your main thesis. But this point was BS:
"mediocre results that will have them regretting their $500 DSLR purchase"

I (still) shoot with a Nikon D3200 because I don't believe a more expensive camera will make be a better photographer. I don't regret the camera, nor the results I get from it. Ever.

3200 is a great camera! Most DSLRs are. We live in amazing times!

I disagree. As most photographers of a certain age, i started with film and changed to digital when is was around 44. Of course because there weren't digital camera before that.

My learning got speedier with digital. I could see what I did wrong or right, I could see what certain settings did or didn't do.
Digital makes it far easier to learn photography.

I won't be encouraging anyone to start photographing with film first, for the same reasons I didn't start my child's bicycle lessons on a penny farthing.

When authors are scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something controversial to say about photography...this is what you get. Explicitly written to stir things up.

No, film is not the way to start someone off on the road to photography. It is not even remotely practical in this day and age. No immediate feedback on your composition is a hindrance to learning. The resulting failures after getting film developed will turn most new comers off, once they see the mistakes the made, and have NO IDEA why those happened.

Sorry this entire article is a huge miss.

I love seeing articles where the comments just rip the author a new one 🤣

When I was a kid I wanted to play the guitar and everyone insisted that I learn acoustic first. The problem is, for a 6 year old, acoustic guitars are hard to play. If I tried hard I could get the hang of it, but I just never wanted to put in that work. Fast forward to my pre-teen years when I still wanted to play guitar and finally got an electric guitar. I LOVED playing that guitar and played all the time. I even went back and started playing acoustic again and found a new appreciation for it. BUT, without that electric guitar I wouldn't have kept playing long enough to do that.
Does learning the struggle-bus analog way technically make you better? Sure, absolutely. But I think it's also a purist/gatekeepery approach to getting people into a hobby.

I would never suggest that a friend start with film. What a waste of time. For the most part, I only see hipsters with film cameras.

Really. Is that what YOU see? Not interesting, and likely an over generalization, but thanks for contributing to the bucket of useless feedback.

Stop trying to overcomplicate things to sound cool. It's like saying to tell your friends to use a typewriter rather than a keyboard.

Why would you assume someone is trying to be hip or cool if they shoot film. Can't they just like it without all the judgment? I mean, who are you? What do you like? What if people said the reason you like the things you do is only because you want to be cool or hip. Choose positivity first, bro. It's free and makes the world better.

How high are you?

Give peace a chance, guy.

So where are they getting this film developed? In their bathroom? Are they buying all the darkroom equipment too?

There are literally dozens of labs around the country you can send your film to. Quick Google search would have lessened the impact of the "dumb comment hammer" you just hit yourself with.

The closest one to me is a 4hr drive. So shove it.

As someone who shoots digital and film I personally disagree with this. You buy a cheap film camera you're more than likely going to end up with something that needs help or it's going to have light leaks, improper exposure, etc. On the other hand you can pickup a cheap but capable used digital camera for $200. No, it's not going to be the latest and greatest but it'll allow you to learn the basics.

I met up with another photographer who's work I admired on IG and he was shooting with a Canon Rebel XT and kit lens- he was using a ball of electrical tape to tape down the shutter button for long exposures. But his work was great. No editing or anything. And when it broke he picked up another one with lens for $100. For $100 you're lucky to shoot and develop six rolls of film.

A colleague of mine who passed away this past January, one of the best photographers I ever saw, claimed that there is no reason to start with film and that it is a waste of time. I always disagreed with him.

Nic was photographing for the past 35 years with 35mm, medium format, and large format cameras. His knowledge of colors and the way he was always so accurate with camera settings -no matter what the conditions were- is credited entirely to his film days. He also did endless black and white developing on his own (he had a darkroom).

He always maintained that B&W photos teach you a lot about composition, expression and overall mood, he was right. Developing and printing thousands of B&W film enriched his skill set tremendously.

He always put down his past and his rich experience claiming that today it's a lot easier to achieve the photos you want. He was right but only partly. His experience with film and different format cameras helped him (tremendously) to successfully create a vision without seeing the results right away, therefore, it was essential to be exact and patient, a skill many of us lack today.

I used to tell him that he reminds me of rich people saying money is not important. It's important when you do not have much of it. I never had that kind of experience and I wish I had started with film.

Respect someone so much you disagree with what they say.... Hmmm.... Perhaps you just were not listening to what he was saying.

Respect and disagreement are not mutually exclusive. Mature adults practice nuance like this simultaneously. You should try it, rather than your little hissy fit outbursts on this comment section.

So respecting someone means never disagreeing with him/her? Seriously?

More comments