Rarely does a day go by that I don’t hear someone say “no one shoots film anymore” or “have you gone digital yet.” It is quite obvious from these words that the photographic community has changed dramatically since the introduction of digital photography. The expectation now is that everyone has gone digital. However, film is far from dead and buried for many photographers.

The purpose of this article isn’t to feed the firestorm that erupts whenever the issue of film vs. digital photography is discussed amongst photographers; rather its purpose is to present the reasons why I continue to shoot film for my personal and professional work. This is not to imply that I will always shoot film, since life and technology constantly change, and we change along with it. However, there is also the old argument to consider, “if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.”

What about digital?

What about digital? One photographer that I respect says on his website that “film is obsolete”, but goes on to say that scanned film is sharper than any digital camera. Looking at the film industry as a whole tells us a much different story. Yes, the industry isn’t the same as it was just 10 years ago, but it is far from dead and buried.

Witness the recent emergence of Ilford, now Ilford/Harmon Technologies from receivership, and the emergence of new film and paper factories in Eastern Europe. Since its emergence from receivership, Ilford has not only reintroduced most of its previous product line, but has added new products for the darkroom worker, as well as adding film in what is referred to as ULF (ultra large format) sizes. Likewise, Kodak has introduced updated color negative films based upon its two-electron technology, and Fuji has introduced or updated 5 transparency films, and due to popular demand is reintroducing Velvia 50 next spring. Clearly, there is still some research and development going on within the industry.

A quick look through the 2006 Photographers Marketplace reveals the majority of listings still list transparency film, 35mm and larger, as acceptable submissions for publication.

These are not signs of an industry that views film as obsolete.

One prominent landscape photographer from the UK, in stating his rationale for abandoning film for digital, gives as one of his reasons the difficulty of traveling with film.  As I write these words, I am in Australia. I traveled here from my home in Hawaii with a large format kit, a 35mm camera, and enough film to carry me through 3 weeks of intense photography. This was all hand carried on the airplane. No, it was not easy carrying this much equipment and film, but I’ve found that if my sole concern is one of convenience, then my photography will suffer.

To use difficulty of transporting materials as a reason is simply a poor excuse. In this modern age, it is quite easy, and reasonable, to use a courier service, such as FedEx, to deliver film and equipment to your final destination or home, if it there is too much to carry.

A Pursuit of Excellence

But what really is it in the end that keeps me shooting film, in a world that has gone almost totally to digital photography? Simply put, it is the pursuit of excellence. What do I define as excellence? As Spanish philosopher and essayist Ortega Y. Gasset once wrote “Excellence means when a man or a woman asks of himself more than others do.” It is the willingness to take the steps necessary to produce an image that is both aesthetically pleasing, and exhibits a feeling of craftsmanship as well.

The digital photography workflow and the results produced by digital cameras, imply to me a “McDonald’s” mentality – one of serving the lowest common denominator – not a mentality of striving for excellence. The pursuit of excellence is one that requires self discipline in the physical practice of photography, not simply flowing with the rest of the photographic world, either through convenience or because it is “good enough.”

This pursuit of excellence is embodied in many aspects of photography, including both a factual, artistic, representation of the subject as well as a physical connection to subject. I see the world as being full of beauty and grace, of fine detail, and of life. Photographing nature is a means of capturing an instant when the life of the world interacts with its beauty. A recent statement by Fuji Photo sums this up quite nicely: "Photographs express every human joy, sorrow, love and emotion, and as such are indispensable to people. ... In particular, film pictures are superior to digital pictures in their power of expression. They may be said to embody the very basics of photography."

It can be said that photographing nature implies a contract with the viewer; that the image presented is truthful and accurate in its presentation, while being aesthetically pleasing, and has not been manipulated beyond that necessary to print the photograph. With digital photography the perceived contract with the viewer is turned over to hardware and software engineers from the moment of capture through to final processing.

A breakdown in the implied contact with the viewer can have disastrous results. A recent example with National Geographic Traveler magazine illustrates this point. In their Jan/Feb 2006 issue, the magazine cover photograph showed snorklers swimming with breaching whales. The impossibility of this situation was pointed out by several readers of the magazine, and confirmed by the magazine in an apology. The damage has been done, to both the magazine, whose truthfulness will be questioned in future issues, as well as the photographer, who for the sake of a sale, not only lied to the magazine, but to the viewer as well.

While it is certainly possible to do similar manipulations with traditional methods, those manipulations are more readily apparent. With digital photography, manipulations are much more difficult to detect, and in fact are often encouraged – if you don’t like the sky in your image, pull one from another image – by other digital photographers and many well known photography magazines. A small lie is a still a lie, and breaks the implied contract with the viewer.

There is also the aspect of a physical connection to the subject. That physical connection manifests itself to the viewer as a feeling of craftsmanship. When we look a transparency on a light table that physical connection is readily apparent; we know exactly how the scene looked to the photographer at the instant the shutter was pressed. When we see a photograph printed on fine silver paper, we know, without anyone telling us otherwise, that the photographer has taken a great deal of time and care with its preparation [Is it any wonder then, that digital photographers try to hide their use of materials through words like Giclee; words that are designed to lure the viewer into thinking that more effort was needed to create the photographic print than there really was?].

It takes much more time, physical effort, and experience to create an image with traditional materials. There is no looking at an LCD to determine if the image has been captured to the photographer’s desire; instead years of experience and insight by the photographer are brought into the process. There is no plugging the camera into a computer, setting a few levels and curves, and then spitting the print out on an ink jet printer; instead care is taken in developing the film, selecting the proper transparency, often one out of many, and only then making the final print.

In short, the pursuit of excellence requires going above and beyond what is expected.

In Conclusion

This article is not intended to imply that everything in the photographic world is as it was just a few short years ago. For example, I can no longer purchase the film I need locally (in Hawaii), but must instead use the Internet for all my film purchases. Likewise, I can no longer go to my local camera store or photography magazine for information regarding the practice of film based photography. Fortunately, Internet based groups, like the Analog Photography Users Group (apug.org) have sprung up to take their place.

These remarks are not intended to cover every aspect and type of photography; I am strictly a color landscape photographer. However, I believe that even commercial photographers should take note – there are commercial photographers, portrait photographers and wedding photographers, among others, who still rely on film based photography for much of their work.

When discussing photography, it should be remembered that photography is subjective; what looks good to one person may not look good to another. For me, I find the current state of digital photography to be lacking; images from digital cameras don’t look sharp to my eyes, nor do they seem to have the color depth and spectralresponse that I seek.

In other words, photography using traditional means isn't broken.