Return to film - a year on

It was back in September last year when I took the difficult decision to set aside some expensive digital gear and go back to shooting film. Digital has a lot going for it - instant feedback and the tremendously creative power of Photoshop being the two most important. But it has drawbacks as well and a major one for me was just a lack of satisfaction. Digital printing aside, which I hate with a vengeance, I find the taking and processing parts of pixel-based photography to be a doddle. So whilst I find it easy enough to take and process images to get them just the way I like, I can't for the life of me get any consistency using inkjet printers.

Dead End

In the last ten years I must have spent close to £1000 on printers and got no more than a handful of good back and white prints from them. I've still got an HP B9180 but gave up using it months ago other than as a normal office printer. I recently checked the cost of a set of inks for it and it was over £200 if I remember correctly (that's quite a lot of film and Multigrade IV). You'll not catch me throwing good money after bad as I rush down that dead end again.

So film it was and black and white exclusively. It felt strange when I returned and the lack of an LCD screen was particularly unsettling. Now it's as if I've never been away. And I can tell you now that my photography is ten times more satisfying. Although I used to look upon negative developing as a chore, I now love the process and the moment when I pull the developed negatives from the spiral just before hanging them up to dry is one of the most rewarding. A properly exposed and developed negative is the promise of good things to come and the culmination of artistic vision and craftsmanship. By comparison, the digital process can sometimes seem like little more than pressing a button on the camera and another few on the computer. Like a lot of modern-day activities, it can feel soul-less.

As a result of ditching digital, I'm glad to say that I'm spending a lot less time at the computer these days. I'm taking photographs, developing film and popping it into negative sleeves. A little scanning is involved to update this website but that's about it. Many blog posts are written on an iPad and a spot of repetitive strain injury I'd been experiencing on my "mouse" hand has largely subsided as a result.

The Fellowship of Film

It's not just about the photography, though. I think most of us are honest enough to admit that we're never really going to make a mark in the world of photography: we're hobbyists, and glad to enjoy that status. Although the image is - and should be - the prime concern, it isn't the whole thing. I also find that what I like to think of as the "fellowship of film" is richer and more interesting than its digital equivalent. Really, there isn't that much variety to the digital process. It's all a variation on a theme, the theme being computers and software. If you're like me, when you're not taking photographs you'll be spending a lot of spare time reading about photography. And there's just so much more to read about where film is concerned! Film, developers, printing paper, toners, enlargers, different formats, DIY cameras - all offering something different. This rich heritage makes the photographic experience so much more immersive.

Another advantage to film photography are the cameras and lenses. I can honestly say, with the possible exception of the Leica M Monochrom (haven't handled one yet but I like the idea), there isn't a single digital camera that I covet. But there are still lots of film cameras I lust after (read on to discover my latest, unrequited love). If you appreciate fine engineering and enjoy using beautifully-crafted and designed tools, then you're unlikely to be happy using digital cameras. It's also interesting to realise that you can find out what cameras your photographic heroes used to use during the film era and follow in their footsteps. An email friend likes the work of W. Eugene Smith and has just bought a Leica IIIf - the model Smith used for some of his most memorable projects. What a brilliant idea! One of my idols was J. Allan Cash, not so much for his photographs but for the fact that he was amongst the first photojournalists to make a full-time living travelling the world and doing something he loved. He used a Leica II with a 50mm Summar. Hmmm... Now it will obviously be possible for digital photographers to do the same thing when pixel-based heroes emerge (are there perhaps some already out there?) but is it likely someone will search out a Canon Digital Rebel to recreate a shooting experience? Not a chance, even assuming that it's possible to find a working example.

Printing Blues

On the downside, I've had rotten luck when it comes to printing - and the irony isn't lost on me! Initially and just as I was getting everything set up, my Durst enlarger packed up. The transformer developed a fault and started to smell as if it was going to burst into flames. Eventually, Cath's dad did a great job of detecting the fault - no mean feat at all - and soldered a couple of replacement widgets into place to bring it back to good health. Then, after just a couple of prints, my Leitz Focomat V35 blew its bulb. This is no ordinary bulb: this is a bulb that is no longer made and neither is there a substitute for it. I can buy a new bulb holder at a cost of £100+ but I'm not going down that route. I have a solution in mind that I'm hoping will work and I'll let you in on that one later.

Concurrent with the Durst coming back on stream, we did a bit of spring cleaning with the result that my darkroom is being used as a store room and isn't fit for printing just now. This is a bigger problem than it sounds. There's a lot of stuff that doesn't have a home right now other than my darkroom. It can't be thrown out and it's not an easy job to put it somewhere else so it will have to stay there for a little while longer. The good news is that I don't have printer heads and ink cartridges drying out at vast expense through lack of use!

Ebony RSW45

Want to buy a D700?

Am I happy I made the switch back to proper photography? Absolutely. Do I plan to go back to digital at any stage? Other than for stock photography, not a chance. In fact, and keep this to yourselves just now, I'm thinking of selling my D700 outfit. It's only going to see use as a stock photography camera now and I reckon I can manage to do that OK with my old Pentax K10D. The Nikon gear is still worth quite a bit of cash and I have to weigh up whether I'd like to hang onto it or perhaps get an Ebony RSW45 instead. If you haven't seen one of these, they're absolutely gorgeous. Ebony and titanium in a lightweight, compact, high quality body with just the movements that a landscape, rather than advertising, photographer might need. I'm going to wait and see how things go with the Tenax 54 before making up my mind.

So that's been my experience and it's mostly all positive. The photography skills I developed over about 35 years and which largely faded away using matrix metering and autofocus have returned. I no longer check the back of the camera to see if I've got the shot: I know I've got the shot. But what about you? Many of you must have made a similar journey back home. If so, it would be great if you could share your own experiences by leaving a comment. How are you coping? Any regrets or is it all plain sailing?