This image made me think about how I go about making an image. It is from about 2 years ago. I wish I could say that it was an intentional shot, but I messed up. I double exposed one side of a film holder. It happens. Working with a 4×5 requires a slow methodical pace, each exposure begs to have deliberate consideration before it is made. At about $5.00 a shot, there is not choice but to think it through.
I can’t make the blanket statement that I am a staunch and faithful film user. It would be broke if that were true. I have been thinking about my process lately, and how I treat my supplies. I hold film up on a pedestal. I would probably hold a Canon 5d mk II on a pedestal too. Chances are I could have afforded one by now had I not squandered money on lenses, film holders, meters, sheet film, processing and labor. I have owned a DSLR for 5 years, and while it’s dated, I used it on a regular basis, but I don’t choose it for the same tasks that I would choose one of my Graflex cameras. I own a point and shoot as well and it produces really nice images, but it doesn’t feel ‘serious’. Sheet film has it’s own appeal. A decent scan is easily trumps the best DSLR, which is funny considering my camera gear is almost as old as my grandparents.
There is something about the thought of taking an exposure when it is put in the context of a limited commodity. Film might be a limitation or a constraint and maybe that is why I like it. It can also far surpasses the depth and resolution of any digital camera I am capable of owning right now. Film is physical, I take some comfort in that fact. I have been making sure I shoot some rolls of my kids and family from time to time. I have embraced digital, I have an archive or thousands of images. I am sitting next to a raid 5 humming away, and various backup drives, but in the end, short of fire, I know my negatives can’t get erased. I have many digital images that I consider precious and I should probably commit more of them to a print in an album, but the sheer number of them is overwhelming. It’s hard to decide what snipet of history deserves to be kept and what gets edited out.
Editing is as much a facility of preproduction as it is post production. I am totally comfortable with machine gunning sequences of images when I am only committing them to a slot on a memory card, but when it boils down to dollars and cents I feel the need to premeditate my selections a bit more. An event or wedding merit a fast sequence of exposures. There is only one shot that will be the best for each staged event, but it would be shame to miss the best one. For my own personal creative practice, there’s not such a pressing time line, my subjects are almost always stationary.
My own reasons for shooting film came though learning and experimentation. I feel like no matter how accustomed I become to an emulsion and a light meter, there are still some variables that film can provide that I cannot get with my digital camera. The first image is a mistake, but in the end I liked what happened. I could deliberately double expose anything. I could go through my archive of images and impose one onto another in Photoshop. I doubt the end result would be as satisfying. I think some of my satisfaction comes from waiting for the film to be developed, the unknown is so appealing.
As a student of photography (not that I will ever stop learning) I approached the process as part technical, part chemical, and part magic. It is useful to have some limitations when you are learning the ropes. Strip away color, strip away ISO choices and you are left with findinggood lght and making choices about composition and exposure. That makes for a great foundation.