Sometimes, I browse through not only my digital photo library but also my collection of hundreds of film negatives, many of which were never printed. So, I scan them and add them to my collection. For example, take a look at these photos https://pulsepx.com/photo/DqvUR4IZIOe and https://pulsepx.com/photo/YM8bGkM0tct. Unfortunately, I can only say that I am growing more technically skilled, but not artistically.
I know exactly what you mean about feeling technically more skilled but not always artistically “further ahead.” I think that tension is part of every creative path. The craft grows more precise, but the artistic spark can feel elusive at times. Still, revisiting and re-scanning older negatives is such a wonderful way to reconnect with the voice you had then — and often it reminds us that artistry shows up in ways we didn’t even recognize at the time.
I am convinced my film photography was better than the majority of my digital work and there are a couple of reasons why. I started shooting film when I was eight with a point and shoot Kodak Brownie, with no controls. My next camera, a Zenit B had only three shutter speeds and a cheap lens, this was when I really learnt to read the available light. No metering, fully manual. I taught myself how to develop my own B&W film then colour transparency film. A very skilled portrait photographer taught me how to print b&w. I spent several years freelancing for newspapers using Nikons, shooting wedding with a Hasselblad and commercial work with 5x4.
Then digital came along and we all got lazy, auto-focus, better metering, instant images for review. Auto winding all we had to do was point it in the right direction and adjust the aperture or shutter speed. Film with only 12 frames or 36 made you think, I very rarely bracketed exposures, I knew it would be fine without seeing it, that was the difference I had the knowledge to trust my judgement. You didn't waste frames just because you could. I and every photographer I knew who covered weddings seldom shot more than 150 frames, now they shoot 5000 !
The other consideration is that this was thirty and more years ago. I'm not sure I could go back to film now, digital has made it too easy.
Thank you for sharing this story — it really captures the essence of what many of us feel when comparing film and digital. The discipline film required, and the trust in one’s own judgment that grew out of those limitations, is something digital rarely forces us to practice. I especially connect with what you wrote about not wasting frames simply because you could — every exposure demanded attention.
At the same time, I think you’re right: digital has changed our habits so much that going back fully isn’t easy anymore. But perhaps even just remembering those film-era disciplines — slowing down, trusting our eye, being deliberate — can help us bring some of that spirit back into the way we shoot today.
Thank you, for those of us who grew up with film there is a path back through experience but the photographer who has only ever experienced digital cannot begin to appreciate what shooting film fully manual was like. I also think my best work was shot on the Hasselblad, if for no other reason than the size of the viewfinder. 5x4 was very slow and much more deliberate but very worthwhile.
Sometimes, I browse through not only my digital photo library but also my collection of hundreds of film negatives, many of which were never printed. So, I scan them and add them to my collection. For example, take a look at these photos https://pulsepx.com/photo/DqvUR4IZIOe and https://pulsepx.com/photo/YM8bGkM0tct. Unfortunately, I can only say that I am growing more technically skilled, but not artistically.
I know exactly what you mean about feeling technically more skilled but not always artistically “further ahead.” I think that tension is part of every creative path. The craft grows more precise, but the artistic spark can feel elusive at times. Still, revisiting and re-scanning older negatives is such a wonderful way to reconnect with the voice you had then — and often it reminds us that artistry shows up in ways we didn’t even recognize at the time.
I like your railway station shot with the statue in the foreground.
This is Lenin's monument, and it was destroyed in the 90s.
I wondered if it might be Lenin. It's a great photo.
I am convinced my film photography was better than the majority of my digital work and there are a couple of reasons why. I started shooting film when I was eight with a point and shoot Kodak Brownie, with no controls. My next camera, a Zenit B had only three shutter speeds and a cheap lens, this was when I really learnt to read the available light. No metering, fully manual. I taught myself how to develop my own B&W film then colour transparency film. A very skilled portrait photographer taught me how to print b&w. I spent several years freelancing for newspapers using Nikons, shooting wedding with a Hasselblad and commercial work with 5x4.
Then digital came along and we all got lazy, auto-focus, better metering, instant images for review. Auto winding all we had to do was point it in the right direction and adjust the aperture or shutter speed. Film with only 12 frames or 36 made you think, I very rarely bracketed exposures, I knew it would be fine without seeing it, that was the difference I had the knowledge to trust my judgement. You didn't waste frames just because you could. I and every photographer I knew who covered weddings seldom shot more than 150 frames, now they shoot 5000 !
The other consideration is that this was thirty and more years ago. I'm not sure I could go back to film now, digital has made it too easy.
Thank you for sharing this story — it really captures the essence of what many of us feel when comparing film and digital. The discipline film required, and the trust in one’s own judgment that grew out of those limitations, is something digital rarely forces us to practice. I especially connect with what you wrote about not wasting frames simply because you could — every exposure demanded attention.
At the same time, I think you’re right: digital has changed our habits so much that going back fully isn’t easy anymore. But perhaps even just remembering those film-era disciplines — slowing down, trusting our eye, being deliberate — can help us bring some of that spirit back into the way we shoot today.
Thank you, for those of us who grew up with film there is a path back through experience but the photographer who has only ever experienced digital cannot begin to appreciate what shooting film fully manual was like. I also think my best work was shot on the Hasselblad, if for no other reason than the size of the viewfinder. 5x4 was very slow and much more deliberate but very worthwhile.
one of your most thoughtful and meaningful missives.
Thank you so much, Michael — I truly appreciate you saying that. It means a lot to know these reflections resonate in a meaningful way.
Me encanta