Film vs Digital Photography a Heated and Worn Out Debate.
In the current day of photography, Digital photography is currently the dominating medium and has been for the previous years. But this wasn’t always the case and with the rise of Film photography as a medium for photographers the battle between film vs digital photography is as old and as heated as ever now.
But what exactly are both sides arguing, and which medium should you choose if you are looking to go into photography either as a career or hobby?
Inherit difference between film and digital photography
When it comes to the inherit differences between film and digital the work flow to me seems to be one of the biggest differentiator between the two mediums. For film the analog process of loading, shooting and developing film has a large appeal to most people but also is the biggest deterrent when it comes to using film in a professional context.
If you are given a tight deadline or are given only 30 minutes with a subject than you can’t waste those crucial minutes loading film and come away not knowing whether any of your photos actually turned out. That’s why digital photography, whether for wildlife, sports, or product photography, is consistently the top choice when you aim to capture subjects in their purest form. It’s clear that the context around what you are shooting gives you a good indicator of what medium to use.
However, what if we shift our perspective and view photography as a solely artistic medium.
Artistic differences
If you asked me my opinion on whether digital photography could replace film photography as an artistic medium before and then after reading Daido Moriyama’s book “How I Take Photographs” you would have received two radically different answers. Daoido Moriyama is a legendary street photographer who began his career in the 60’s which means that for over 40 years of his career he used film for his street photography. But in this book that I bought largely because I saw that he shot on film it talks about him switching to using digital cameras in 2008 and I first like many others was offended when first reading his decision. To me there is an almost instant distinction between film and digital especially when it comes to street photography that I thought you could never marry digital with street photography but Mr.Moriyama succeeds in proving me wrong.
Flipping through the various photos in his photo book I am stunned to believe that all of these are taken on digital cameras, not to mention digital cameras with sensors magnitude smaller and lower quality then what we have now. But they all radiate the presence of Moriyama, so well in fact that I believe that I could almost instantly tell whether a photo was shot by Moriyama or not solely just on the composition and contrast. Which is why when I hear what Moriyama has to say about what medium he chooses to use I understand that I have much more room to grow before I get the confidence that he so strongly speaks with.
“I’ve always said it doesn’t matter what kind of camera you’re using — a toy camera, a polaroid camera, or whatever — just as long as it does what a camera has to do.”
Moriyama’s Philosophy is that cameras are just tools and although they have their differences they all serve more or less the same purpose and it shouldn’t have any effect on your artistry. He even goes a step farther and says that those who are attached to the dying medium — by 2008 however film might have already been dead six feet under at that point — are clinging to past ways, which is definitely harsh for someone with over 40 years of film experience to say.
Although I don’t entirely agree with Mr.Moriyama philosophy it surely is contagious to believe that you can create at your highest level with anything and there is some merit to the idea that a good photographer isn’t limited by the camera in their hand. In a recent episode of the film podcast Mamiyamigos hosted by two large film social media influencers and people who’s work I look up to, their guest Sissi Lu said something similar to Moriyama’s Philosophy
“I think you can give me any camera and as a photographer I should know how to make it work.”
Which I think entirely summarizes my current point of view on film photography and photography in general better than I could.
Conclusion (maybe)
I think you could write a full dissertation on the differences between film and digital photography but like almost every dissertation on any abstract subject … what differences does it make ? Even if there was a full blown paper published by MIT and Harvard with a proof about how digital is in every way better than film published tomorrow. You will still find me and other suckers paying $25+ for a pack of Portra 400 at the local camera shop the next day. At the end of the day it feels wimpy to say but it is entirely up to what you find fun shooting.
Some people have fun spending ridiculous amounts of money on overpriced silver halide packaged in little canisters that they then stick into their completely reasonably priced camera that they found on eBay which will end up breaking in 4 months but that's okay they’ll just sell or gut one of their last 3 cameras that they bought to repair it. Because they enjoy the tendinous that comes with the community and experience.
And on the other hand some people have fun making money shooting photos that the client doesn’t want to wait ages for, or have fun shooting wildlife or sport photography and don’t care about artistic crap like film grain and what ever that ring below the focus controls, because they know they are able to capture moments in time frozen so clearly that it will let other people relive that moment as it was in its entirety.
At the end of the day like any other hobby or profession you only are going to be satisfied once you put in the effort and time, — and money — but if you truly find yourself stuck chose one and worry about the rest later because photography isn’t ever about the future but rather the now.