People often ask why I still shoot with film rather than digital for most of my personal work.
It’s partly because I love the tactile nature of film, loading it in the camera, processing it, playing with the chemicals, etc. I feel like I am more in control of the process, which probably sounds a bit odd given the amount of control we now have with digital processing. I guess what I mean is that with digital, a lot of the creation relies on computers, whether they be in my cameras or on my desktop. Sure, I can manipulate that process to a massive degree, but it’s not the same as working with film.
Film has a life of its own, and to get the best from it a photographer needs to understand the nature of the film, how it behaves in different situations, and work with it to get the best out of it under those circumstances. It is far more challenging, but far more involving. When I’ve produced an image on film, I feel like I had to work to create it. I had to interact with the medium, manipulate it, and appreciate its nuances to get the best from it, whereas I don’t get the same feeling with digital.
Here’s some shots from Tassie, shot last year. They were shot on a type of film that has been around for over 40 years, on a camera made over 40 years ago. The camera and films have been around longer than I have.
Some things never change.
And I love that some of my wedding clients also appreciate film, and that I still get to shoot film at some of the weddings I cover.