Lessons on Film Photography
At the outset, I should issue an apology (mainly to myself) for my lack of attention to this blog. I started jotting a few ideas down when life was at a bit more of a lull back in April, but May was arguably one of the more hectic months in recent memory. At any rate, here we are.
Since leaving for New Zealand back in February, I put a great deal of emphasis on shooting film in 2025. In the year prior, I had started to take a greater interest in film photography, primarily due to my knack for taking up expensive hobbies. I found that the thrill of having film scans arrive in my email inbox was one of the more exciting parts of photography, and so I began to lean in towards the end of the fall.
Despite my growing interest however, I seemed to always be missing something in my images. Whether it was composition, choosing the wrong film stock, or simply missing focus, I have had my slew of issues with film photography- each of which I hope to unpack here. I have finally reached a point where I feel comfortable with my capacity to shoot film, and I felt it would be fun to break down a few things that I have learned. Some of them more obvious than others.
Milford Sound. Portra 400.
Light Matters.
When I first started my photography journey, I truly did not understand the importance of light in taking strong photos. Due in part to the tendency of our society to take photos of every moment with our cellphones, I never really thought about how light might affect the quality of a photo. I used to see good photos and take them at face value, without ever thinking about how a light source might motivate or accentuate a photograph. After spending some time shooting film, I recognize now the importance of good lighting.
The benefit of shooting digitally (and specifically shooting RAW) is that you are able to access more detail in images to adjust them in post. Until shooting film, I did not understand how much of a luxury it was to be able to alter photos in this way. Aside from changing the settings at the time of shooting the photo or physically altering the film production when it is being developed, there is much less room for error than shooting digitally. If I were to shoot in a dark room on a digital camera, I am more likely to be able to recover the image from the shadow details. However, on film, the details are buried in the shadows, and are often not recoverable in the same way.
For this reason, I have placed a much greater emphasis on making sure my subjects and scenes are properly lit. At this point, photographers who have some experience may be rolling their eyes at such an obvious realization, but I think this is something that I had completely undervalued as a novice photographer.
Bluff, NZ. Ilford HP5 Push +1
2. Film Stocks make a difference
When I began shooting film, I thought that there were really only two types of film: black and white, and colour. My first few forays into film photography had me shooting whatever box I thought looked cool. While this could definitely be a fun strategy, I found that my photos were continuously turning out quite poorly. With the gift of hindsight, I now understand that perhaps trying to shoot Cinestill 50D for example might be a poor idea in a dimly lit music venue. Who knew?
Throughout my time in California and New Zealand, I’ve become much more familiar with a wider variety of film stocks and how they perform. From Kodak Gold and Portra 400 to Cinestill 800 and 50D, I’ve been trying to branch out to actually test the film for myself. You can look up any variety of images online to try and understand the film stocks, but I have found that personally shooting them has helped me to better understand where they are useful.
For my part, I have naturally found that my favourite film stocks are the most expensive. Shocking. Portra 400 has been my go-to for most of my travel photography, and Cinestill XX has been my first choice when shooting black and white. Recently however, I have become much more partial to shooting Ektar 100, and came away with a few images that I would consider to be some of my favourite. Finding your preferred look is an absolutely vital part of film photography.
Dunedin, NZ. Ilford HP5 Push +1
3) Film Stock and Limitations
The primary difficulty with shooting film and owning just one camera is that you are locked into that colour profile until you finish the roll. This limitation can, at times, be incredibly frustrating; however, it also presents an opportunity.
In recent weeks I have been trying to place myself in situations where I am limited in some capacity- whether that is only shooting Black and White, only using a prime (fixed) lens on my digital camera, or simply focusing specifically on one type of subject. I have found that instead of wishing I was using a different lens, film stock, or camera, I have been quite content in accepting the challenge.
In a perfect world, I would love to be walking around with two film cameras; one shooting colour, the other in black and white. Yet, I find that I am paying more attention to the world around me and being more selective about when I am pressing the shutter.
Lyttelton, NZ. Ektar 100.
4) Cameras matter, but not really
Gear Acquisition Syndrome, or G.A.S, is one of the most common plagues upon photographers, musicians, athletes- you name it. The binding core belief is that higher quality gear = higher quality output- whether that be photos, songs, or athletic performance. Certainly, higher-quality gear can affect some significant features of the output, but the reality is that high-quality output comes from a mix of practice and talent.
I have been using a tiny Pentax ME Super for just over three years. A consumer camera made in the early 1980’s, it has been a bit of a challenge to get used to, but the camera has generally served me quite well. Recently, I have been considering an upgrade to something like a Nikon F3, but I am also somewhat on the fence about spending the money.
In recent months, I have taken some photos with this 43 year-old camera that have brought me a great deal of joy. Some might argue that some of the photos are quite good. If you had asked me even a year ago if my camera was capable of taking these photos, I would have responded with a resounding “no”.
The difference from then to now is that I feel as though I now have a better grasp of how all elements of film photography work together to create a good image. While having a Leica M6 would certainly be wonderful, it would mean absolutely nothing if I did not have a working knowledge of light, composition, ISO rating on film stocks, shutter speed, aperture, and how to properly focus on my subjects. Despite some drawbacks of the ME Super (build quality, lens durability, etc.), the camera is perfectly capable of producing excellent images as long as the user has an understanding of the above factors. Any photographer worth their salt can produce an acceptable image from any camera.
With all of that said, would I like to own a Leica M6 or a Contax T2? Yes, yes I would. Donations currently being accepted. Yet to argue that it is the “camera’s fault” for photos not quite turning out is not always an explanation that is good enough.
Lyytelton, NZ. Ektar 100.
5) It’s just more fun.
Listen, I love my digital cameras. The reason that I became so obsessed with photography in the first place, and why I have stuck with it, is because of the amazing capabilities of modern cameras. I have had some amazing opportunities because of my little X-S20, and realistically, I wouldn’t be able to shoot concert photos or videos without them. Everything I have begun building relies upon digital photography.
With that said, I believe that the essence of what photography is (and should be) is encapsulated by film photography. If photographs are about capturing fleeting moments in time, they should be special- because the moments themselves are impermanent.
This should, in turn, translate to having limited opportunities to take the photograph. If you are able to fire off 100 shots in less than 10 seconds of the same scene, it doesn’t quite have the same effect as hitting the shutter and feeling the film physically turn as you re-load to the next frame. The tactile experience provides an opportunity to actually engage with the physical process, while making a mental note of whether the scene in front of you is worth 1 of your valuable 36 shots.
Every time I receive a set of film scans, I take the time to sort through and re-live the moments that I have captured. With digital photography, I just find that sometimes the photos lack a soul. It seems pretentious, but I feel that film photography has a permanence to it that is not as easily found as when I am shooting digitally. It feels real.
In any case, I have managed to write a short paper once again. If you’ve read this far, I hope it has been engaging in some capacity. Maybe you think I’ve lost my mind- quite possible.
On a side note, shooting film in New Zealand is expensive. I am slightly ashamed to admit that I did spend $60 on one roll of Ektar 100.
Good thing the shots were worth it.
Dunedin, NZ. Ilford HP5 Push +1.
