Tag:digital
In today’s world, where smartphone photography dominates and people seek instant gratification, a quiet revolution is happening. Once considered a thing of the past, film photography is making a solid comeback. Photographers and enthusiasts are rediscovering the appeal of film.
Embracing the Analog Renaissance:
In our current era, where megapixels and instant filters dominate the world of photography, there has been a resurgence of interest in film photography, which reflects a desire for a more measured and unhurried approach to capturing images. Enthusiasts of this medium are once again savouring the tactile pleasure of using film cameras, manually adjusting exposure settings, and eagerly awaiting the development of their photographs in the darkroom.
Starting with film
My film journey started with a Kodak Box Brownie – a 13th birthday gift. From there, I moved to Instamatics, then used my father’s Voigtlander before buying my own Pentax K1000. However, when digital arrived, I moved over that with a Panasonic Lumix, which had a massive 4-megapixel! How times have changed! However, digital technology provides instant pictures, no wasted shots, and no buying of film or paying for development.
The Unfiltered Aesthetic:
One of film photography’s main draws is its unique aesthetic to images. The grain, colour rendition, and dynamic range of film create a distinct and timeless quality that digital processes often struggle to replicate. Photographers are drawn to the authenticity and imperfections inherent in film, finding beauty in the medium’s unpredictability.
Shooting with film requires a certain level of mindfulness that is often absent in the fast-paced world of digital photography. Every frame becomes a thoughtfully planned composition, and the restricted number of exposures per roll pushes photographers to refine their skills and pay closer attention to detail.
Film Availability
With the renewed interest in film, leading manufacturers are releasing new film stocks and returning discontinued ones. Kodak, for example, ceased production of its Ektachrome film in 2013 but re-introduced it in late 2017. CineStill 400D film was recently released in 35mm and 120 medium format. Kodak also introduced the Kodak Gold 200 in 120 format. Ilford has been successful with its Kentmere 100 and 400 films in 35mm and has now also released them in 120 format. ORWO Wolfen has re-entered the market by launching its first Color C41 film in 50 years, the NC500, and introducing the NC400 in 35mm.
Rediscovering the Darkroom:
Photography is not just about taking pictures by clicking the shutter button. Developing and printing film in a darkroom is an art form in its own right. Many photographers have rediscovered their love for this process, enjoying the chemical process and the satisfaction of watching an image develop slowly onto photographic paper. Back in 1969, I actually had a darkroom in the family bathroom. Developing my own black-and-white prints was great fun!
Getting your film roll developed
It’s not like the old days when every pharmacy did one-hour prints – now, getting your roll of film prints is a slower process. And, regardless of the resurgence of film, only a few places do C-prints (a photographic print made from a colour negative or slide).
The storefront ones I know of are:
- Hillvale in Brunswick,
- Ikigai Camera in Williamstown North,
- Halide Supply in Collingwood,
- Vanbar Imaging in Fitzroy
- Walkens House of Film in Fitzroy
- Camera Warehouse Rockdale, NSW
Film Costs
The average cost of a roll of 35mm film is around $16 for a Fuji 200 colour, 36 exposures, and can go up to $35 for a Kodak Portra 400, 36 exposures. Developing costs, for example, vary from $19.90 at Camera Warehouse to develop and scan to $29 to develop and print. Many offer mail-in development, with a download link for your images provided once processed, or you can have the prints posted to you.
Film prints vs digital:
While more expensive than digital, each film-based photograph becomes a tangible, cherished artefact. They evoke a sense of nostalgia and permanence in an age of fleeting digital imagery. However, I must confess, I don’t miss storing photo albums on bulging shelves, nor having numerous boxes of prints. Digital is so much easier to store.
The resurgence of film photography is more than a trend; it is a testament to the enduring appeal of analogue processes in our increasingly digital world. As young and old photographers rediscover the joys of shooting film, the art form is experiencing a renaissance that celebrates the deliberate, tangible, and timeless. In capturing the present through the lens of the past, film photography is not merely a revival but a celebration of the enduring magic of visual storytelling.
Should landscape photographers manipulate images? (take vs make an image) Manipulating an image, is it acceptable? I would have to say, straight off the bat, that I am firmly in the camp of making the image. While I hope for a great sky or light when I shoot, I am not against swapping in a new sky or adding light to create a better image. When the circumstances or conditions have given me lemons, I make lemonade.
Straight from the camera?
I also realise that some of you are throwing up your hands in horror and reminding me that this is totally unacceptable when entering competitions. However, I don’t enter competitions, and should I enter one, I wouldn’t use an image that has been heavily manipulated. Apart from that, I love manipulating an Image. Painters don’t necessarily paint what they see. They take artistic license – and people accept that as normal. With photographers, though, there is a large school of thought that the image should be as it was photographed, without adding or removing elements. So I tend to regard myself as someone who paints with a camera. I guess I could call myself a creative or ‘fine art photographer’ as it seems that you can change elements in fine art.
This school of thought seems to apply almost exclusively to landscape photography, and to a lesser degree, portraits. For an image that is obviously a composite or more in the digital manipulation section, adding or removing elements is not only acceptable but part of the process.
Changing a sky
Back in January, back when the world was still chugging along, oblivious to the oncoming pandemic and associated lockdowns, I enjoyed a quick overnight trip down to Portland where we stayed at the Cape Nelson Lighthouse. Coming back, we stopped off at a lavender farm. The sky was a bland white; the lavender wasn’t a lovely purple without sunshine. Had we been there in perfect conditions – I could have gotten the shot I wanted. However, at home, with Photoshop and Luminar, I edited and created the image that I could have gotten had the conditions been right… as a painter could without criticism.
Making the image doesn’t mean every image I take is manipulated, but I am not against having it in my bag of tricks. I also believe that if an image does have a swapped in the sky, it’s a bit dishonest to pretend it’s not. But, at the end of the day, my images are for me. I don’t sell them (no one wants them, LOL). I don’t enter competitions. They are just for my enjoyment, so I am not cheating or fooling anyone.
With the new Luminar Ai due out before the end of the year, this topic will not go away. Full disclosure, I have already pre-ordered my copy. What are your thoughts? Do you take or make an image?