kmallick
Well-known
I like lagging edge technology and the whole process of loading, shooting, developing & printing. And although I use digital cameras, I enjoy the films ones to avoid this:

There is a famous (among anglers) quote from John Buchan which, while it applies perfectly to fishing, is also equally relatable to many photographers and why they keep picking up the camera and going shooting:
"The charm of fishing is that it is the pursuit of what is elusive but attainable, a perpetual series of occasions for hope."
That next click of a shutter may be your best shot, so keep at it. 🙂
Makes sense... it is what keeps you enthralled!
I don't see the point of blowing something up beyond a certain limit of resolution, just to prove the difference of the medium.
BobYIL;1964756...if I were told that time a day will come and some turntables will be offered for above $10.000 said:Today you can spend well over $200,000 on a turntable/cartridge/phono-preamp.
As the grooves in your LP reflect the soundwaves created at the recording session, so the photons that inspired you to press the shutter are reflected in the slide or negative you hold in your hand years later. If this be metaphysics, make the most of it! 🙂
Second, as the masses march into the digital realm, film is, and will continue, to become a sort of lost art. Not that it'll ever truly go away completely, but 50 years from now, when unfamiliarity with film actually *is* fairly commonplace, finding some old codger that still shoots & develops film will be as rare as finding someone today that has a fully functioning Model T that they drive on a regular basis. Being a part of this sort of 'forgotten way' sort of makes me feel like a torch-bearer, and hopefully, at some point, I'll be able to pass it on. If I survive this life long enough, maybe to someone who, quite literally, has never worked with film in their lives.
Lastly, and probably most relevant, I shoot film because it appeals to some deep-seeded part of my personality that craves reality.
While I certainly respect a well done digital photo, and I fully understand that post-processing is a part of nearly any photographic process, I can't help but understand that, given the same starting photo and a set of instructions and values, nearly anyone could do the same work (granted, it's the lack of these instructions and values that separate the average from the good, but the point is still valid).
I like a process that requires a unique personal touch on a real, tangible object, a process that you must be so completely involved in, that the results are uniquely yours. That another could go through the same motions and end up with a completely different end-result.
It's very true what Chris has said here IMO ... there is nothing magical or mystical about film.
This perception has only arisen since the mass movement towards digital ... it wasn't talked about prior to this ... it was just the way you took photographs!
Just think, 50 years from now, someone will be holding up an ancient D800, M10 or something or other and exclaiming "Now this camera had soul...."
I like the new avatar Akiva. 🙂
'Mysticism?' ... I think with the constant, relentless roll out of new digital gear the stability of film and the cameras that use it is reassuring. I'm finding this constant barrage of new digital cameras pretty tedious personally ... it's de-valuing what I regard as a legitimate art form and turning it into more twenty first century consumer driven crap to amuse the masses.