Film vs Digital (medium format comparison) 

sorry for the obnoxious license plate blur I tried using RU-vids autoblur and its horrible. don't go stalk my friend who lent me their car to drive on the beach k thanks

I really enjoy both film and digital. It all matters for me how i feel for that day. I really enjoy your videos. Thank you.

Love the fact that you call out that making these videos is a great reason to go out and shoot! Really enjoyed your perspective of film vs digital photography.

I will put my 2c in. I am a beginner with a minimum of knowledge. I would love to be outside like you doing medium format film. I learnt something, with your comments on a blue sky. I saw another video similar to yours. The guy was out in some desert region in bright sun taking medium format film photos. They were everything that I would want. That would be my goal. Two issues, I don't have the knowledge and I don't have the money. Maybe some day. At the moment, digital is the appropriate tool for me, because I don't care about the final product. Of course I do but that isn't my goal. My goal at the moment is to photograph things that mimic the lessons I am looking at. For example I want to photograph converging lines. I am trying to sensitise my brain to seeing in the environment. So digital is perfect. I was so impressed by this guys desert photos I had to look into it. In my mind, I can describe what I was seeing that was attracting me. when I tried to look into it I believe I was right. The larger sensor or negative in medium format allows for the inclusion of a broader colour palate. Or to put it in other words, there are more graduations across the photo and not the sharp changes in tints and shades. That is what thrills me.

Can relate to this so much haha. Just got a medium format digi for client safety because the Mamiya 7 was used in some interesting situations for me but once you get that lab relationship / workflow down it’s so enjoyable. Digi editing also such a learning curve

I really like the gradients in the digital skies. The hue is a bit off, but that‘s easily fixed in post

For me it always comes down to two things too... the process of film... there's a rhythm that just cannot be replicated. And second, film just handles bright light so much better, especially in the highlights. I love shooting my Fuji GFX too but there's just something sterile about it.

I think the really saturated blue is a Pentax thing. I have been shooting Nikon D850 for years and Zf since launch, and I noticed sky in 645Z is very blue the day I bought it. When I was doing my research of 645Z, I saw a lot of very blue skies and I assumed they pulled saturation slider too far. Apparently that is not the case.

They are quite different processes even if film is scanned and there are many aspects to film that are difficult to replicate with digital and vice versa.

Great video, thank you so much

Great video ! Look forward to more videos !

I feel like medium format film is quite close to medium format digital once edited properly because of the sharpness. But 135mm film is hard to mimic using digital sensors. Yes you can unsharp the image but the grain is always different.

I struggle with wanting to use my full frame digital camera, I see it more as a tool for video and my film cameras for photos but there is nothing wrong with incorporating both into your work flow. Whatever gets you out to shoot and enjoy the process.

Another great video bro! Loved it!

I can relate to your point about photographs on film either coming out way worse or way better than I remember. It's what makes me keep shooting film and chasing those outstanding, almost magical results that pop-up every so often unexpectedly. And of course, often times the photo just doesn't work on film and I feel defeated. But through understanding different film stocks, light conditions, exposure, scene elements, and just having shot with film enough times, I kind of know what will work and my hit rate is always increasing.

I have 3 TLRs for 6*6. Sometimes I do quibble about the price, but that's only because I use them regularly. I feel if I got a really good digital like a Leica (I have 2 contax rangefinders with lens already)I may not use it enough to justify the price over a number of years. If I get tired of my film cameras I have already got enough values and enjoyment out of them. Of course I do have digital cameras when I need to be fast at 5 FPS, but medium format should be a slower process in film or digital

Very relateable!! I'm not ashamed to admit that If i didn't have film, i wouldn't be out shooting at all. I really appreciate how much film made me more interested in everything around me! But funny enough, a good number of fav photography pages to follow on instagram shoot digital lolll 🙈

Great film is still light-years ahead of digital with regard to the end quality results. The main problem with film is the constant associated cost, and then storage after the fact.

Always film. Price must be into consideration

I want to like film but digital is just so affordable that I can't be bothered to buy film and then get it developed, I grew up with film cameras and remember having to save the coins I got as change to get them developed when I was a kid.

Also you should try lomo 100 cn if you want film a bit cheaper. It's good in 35mm or 120

First I just wanna say excellent work. @ around 1:10 is that the dune shack trail? I’m also a local film photographer (south shore) been shooting street and Boston in general for years now. recently I’ve been feeling burned out on the street and started exploring the cape and working on more long term projects. Glad to find more local film photographers with similar mindsets.

Good stuff homie! Preesh the shout out too

Now I understand!

Did you use UV filter for the digital? I’ve seen it taking this digital blue out for this time of the day

Enjoyed this. If you slightly desaturated the blues and perhaps shot the digital with a half-stop more light and lift the shadows, you are there.

Film of course cuz im cool

To my eyes, in your video, which I really enjoyed, all the film shots were the best. The digital just looked, well, digital; slightly unreal, too perfect, computerised ??? I do film and digital with Fuji X, Leica M and Nikon. Film is just better IMO, even when it's not so good, it has more character and more surprises.

If you had shot on Kodak chrome or ektar chrome then you would see how sky would be more saturated and darker like digital camera !

I prefer film but color is way too expensive, that's why I shoot film in B&W (bulk load and develop myself) and shoot color with digital. I stopped trying to imitate film with digital, it doesn't work for me. I have Fujifilm cameras but I don't bother with film simulations. I wish there was a camera with 1:1 sensor who could shoot like kodachrome 25 direct in camera. This would be a dream really :-)

been struggling with this lately. every once in a while ill grab my digital and i think the editing process is actually pretty fun and relaxing, but it doesn't hit the same as shooting film. guess we'll just keep emptying the bank account ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

1.Film was never designed to viewed on a screen,print film then you will see why it is superior to digital.(and not forget dynamic range,resolution and highlights on film,they just better).

The price difference has never been a factor for me. Digital images that aren't scans (most digitised negatives are taken with a specialised digital sensor after all, if not with an actual digital camera), are just different, they lack *something* film has. No preset can bring that back. Mostly I prefer the experience of shooting film. I have a mirrorless camera for my negatives and streaming, but couldn't use it instead of Tmax, Tri-X, Portra or Ektar.

2:03 the blur really went: And I oop

I do understand his point in making this video, but in absolute comparison terms, it really is a pointless exercise. The reason? The film, once processed, is necessarily run through a digital imaging process which places a complete layer of "digital" between the film image and the final positive result. That digital processing, whichever technology you choose, is going to automatically insert image affecting adjustments to the final digital image of the film negative. (No, I'm not a digital Luddite. I shoot my social shapshots on an old Canon Powershot. I shoot my serious color photography on a Pentax 67, then either make traditional prints in my darkroom, or I scan the negative in a high end Minolta MF scanner and do an ink-squirt print.) Tip: It takes less time to do it in the darkroom.

Its not film if you scan it ! never had a scanner in the old days ! Print it .