Nature's Pencil: Medium
Film v. Digital
I choose ...... Film
The era of film seems to be ending. Some would say it is already over. The future of still photography appears to be digital. The practical conveniences of digital image capture have for the last several years made it the most convenient choice for most people, and for most photography.
In the old days, before digital image capture, Fuji Velvia for colour and Ilford HP5 for Black and White met almost all my needs in both 35mm and 6x7 formats and many years ago I learned to make my own prints the old fashioned way in a wet darkroom both in Black and White and in colour.
From the late 1990's onward my reasons for continuing to use film were not entirely rational! As a full time computer consultant I spent half my waking life at a computer keyboard. Making photographs, in the field or the darkroom, was a welcome change. If photography were to become nothing more than yet another branch of applied computing it would have held little interest for me.
Whatever your view on whether digital quality has matched or exceeded the quality of 35mm or medium format film, there is no longer any doubt that digitally captured images are good enough for most purposes. Current (2007) expert opinion is that the best 35mm style DSLRs capture more detail with than 35mm film and challenge 645 format as well as having the advantage of being grain-free at slow ISO/ASA settings. Consider that most photographs are printed at 6"x4" for family albums (that is, if they are printed at all); that most published photos are reproduced small in books and magazines or on the web; and that very few photographers need reproductions any bigger than A4 size, and fewer still need A3 or larger. It is clear that digital capture easily meets the technical requirements of most photographers. Those that need more resolution will continue to use 4"x5" sheet film and a view camera to get the results they want.
On the face of it the only real-life drawbacks of digital photography are: the horrors of digital image management; the rare need (say when travelling miles from civilisation) to be battery independent; and maybe a handful of specialist applications for which digital capture is unsuitable (though I confess I can no longer think of any!). In fact it is not that straightforward, and old-fashioned film, even in the smaller formats, is still a perfectly viable and respectable medium, whatever Ken Rockwell might say about it.
In 2004 I sold all my film cameras in favour of digital image capture. In 2007 I returned to film for most of my photography. I still use digital capture for utilitarian stuff like catalogue shots, passport portraits and the like. Like everyone else I appreciate the instant feedback, low marginal cost of extra exposures, and speedy post-processing.
But it is a fact that the images I make with a digital camera are, with few exceptions, forgettably mediocre. When I use film I make far fewer exposures, but get far more pictures that are worth looking at. I can't say for sure why that is. Being freed from all the clutter of extra batteries, chargers, and computers helps. So does the more careful and thoughtful approach. The simple and direct control of a Leica rangefinder camera is also an important factor. And we must not forget that with film there is no temptation to review shots immediately after they have been taken. That may be useful for a beginner, but when you know what you are doing it is just one more distraction. I also like the fact that once the film is developed I can simply store it in an archival box, and have no worries about losing the image through a computer crash, or obsolescence of the storage media. (There are other risks - flood, fire, fungus - but somehow they seem less threatening)
Most importantly, the very few really stunning images that I get from time to time still always seem to come on those days that I spend with a manual camera, one lens, and a couple of rolls of film. And so I shall continue to use film for much of my photography for as long as it remains available.
Most of my prints are made from digital files - the case for the digital darkroom is far stronger than the case for digital capture. But for all the advantages of digital post-processing and printing there is still nothing to match the beauty of a traditional, hand-crafted Black and White print. What is more, I still, from time to time, quite enjoy sloshing chemicals about and making B&W prints the old fashioned way!!