Why film when digital is better on paper

Read time
2 minutes

Body
Digital is better. Faster. Cleaner. Higher ISO. Autofocus that can track a sparrow across the High Street. You press the button and the camera does its quiet wizardry. The files are perfect before you even have a coffee.

So why film. Because perfection numbs you if you are not careful. Film takes away the cushion. You count frames. You second guess. You pay attention. The work slows down in a way that makes the pictures louder.

My first few rolls were a mess. Mis-metered, soft at the edges, and occasionally wonky because I was too excited to level the camera. Yet inside the chaos there were two or three frames per roll that made me feel something. Not because they were technically better than the digital version. Because I had to live the moment twice. Once when I made the frame. Then again when the scan appeared and reminded me what I thought I saw.

The other reason is rhythm. Film gives a day a shape. You start with a fresh roll and a small plan. You walk until the counter hits twelve. You find a coffee, look back at what you think you have, then carry on. The constraint becomes a metronome. Thirty six clicks is a lovely way to measure a walk.

There are downsides. Cost. Waiting. The small agony of a scratched neg or lab dust. None of that makes me a better person. But it keeps my eyes engaged and my edits honest. I bin more. I keep less. The wins feel earned rather than harvested.

I still use digital most of the time, including weddings. It is practical and consistent. Film is a spice I add when the light or the story calls for it. Not to be clever. To stop myself from drifting into autopilot.

One tip if you are starting
Pick one camera and one stock for three months. Shoot two rolls a week. Note the time and weather on your phone. Review scans on Sundays and write three lines about what worked. Boring beats clever for the first stretch.