Something happened to me over a decade and a half ago that changed how I think about photography. I had my digital camera and a new medium format film camera. And I stumbled upon a composition I was just really excited about. And one of the cool things is, is that I took the shot with both cameras. And when I got home, I was surprised that I preferred the digital shot. Film is supposed to be way better and superior, right? Well then why did I prefer the digital shot? I realized that film doesn't make an image special. The photographer's creative approach, their vision, their eye. That's what makes a shot special. Or maybe it does. Let's re-scan this negative in a minute and re-compare 16 years later. So welcome. My name is Jesse. I'm a filmmaker and photographer. My last video just went over 80,000 views. So I am continually blown away that people look at my channel, watch my stuff and care about what I have to say.

So thank you. I won't let you down. I promise I won't let you down. I may let you down later,
but I won't let you down like soonish. I have no current plans to let you down. If you know anything about me
or the videos on this channel, you know that I like to create stuff. Mostly, I like to make images with things
like this, like this, and like this, or this. But where it all started
was here with film. I grew up on the tail end of film. I spent my teens shooting film
on an old SLR, and then in high school. I had my first exposure
to digital cameras. We had a Sony Mavica, this old digital camera
that recorded on floppy disks. I've made a video about it.
It's pretty hilarious. I remember waiting so long for each
image to write to the disk. And then in college, I
was an early adopter for once in my life.

I bought a Sony F717 digital camera. I was in design school. I had to take a lot of product and packaging shots. And just being able to set the white balance in camera made product shots so simple. And even though I was fully embracing film, I still had a full. I still had a full darkroom in my basement. I still loved film, and I still shot it. I just loved the process. I still love the process. But is film better than digital? Back in 2008, I was working at an ad agency, and I had to go to the summer party. And despite the clichés about advertising, I was not a big partier. I was sort of like a poorly adjusted, introverted homeschooler kid. I went to the summer party, and I took my two favorite things: my blankies, my binkies, my two new cameras, A Canon Rebel 400d or XTi, and a new to me, Yashica medium format TLR.

And while I was at the party, I stumbled
across one of my favorite compositions. There's a dude sunbathing. I don't know, sleeping, or drunk, or both. And I just thought
it was a hilarious picture. And I was so excited
that I had my film camera with me. But I thought, you know,
I've got my digital camera. Let's frame up with the digital camera
before we spend any film on this frame. Back then, I would get my negatives back
and a low-res scan on a disc like a CD-ROM was a very long time ago. I remember looking at the film scan
and being disappointed. It was super warm. Maybe it was because it was low-res, but
I just remember not being happy with it. When I look back at it
today, that warmth has this sort of funny Kenny Rogers Roasters Kramer vibe to it,
which I think is kind of funny. But at the time, the image
that spoke to me was the digital shot.

Maybe the framing was a bit funnier. It's what made it into my printed portfolio,
and it's what is on my site to this day. What I figured out in
this moment was super important for me. It was a realization
that what didn't matter was the camera, or the medium, or the brand,
or what really matters is the photographer's approach,
eye, the creative intent. I feel like I kind of leveled up that day. I feel like I kind of. Leapfrogged
all those. People arguing about film versus
digital... Canon vs Nikon vs Sony. It's like my head sort of popped
above the clouds, and all those people arguing and gatekeeping their voices
got a lot quieter. It was motivating for me to just keep
working and keep building my portfolio. I wasn't just listening to untested,
unsolicited advice. I was actually messing around
and finding out and I discovered that. Film and digital are.

Not mutually exclusive. It doesn't have to be a binary choice. My worst nightmare is being one of those
old dudes that argues about whether Chev or Ford is better. The last thing I want to be
is loyal to a corporation. That sounds very un artist to me. Picasso sponsored by Squarespace. Picasso. I only use Winsor Newton paints. I don't know. The first thing I do when I get a camera
is I take over the brand name. I don't even like use a strap
because firstly, I feel like the strap catches on things and I've dropped cameras with straps
more than without them. But also, there's a big stupid logo embroidered
all the way down the strap. I don't want people's introduction to me reading Canon or Sony or whatever for the Sunbather shot. You could argue that the humor came through clearer
on the digital shot, which made me wonder, am I using film
as a crutch when I just don't.

Have anything meaningful
to shoot this film? Just like a really expensive
Instagram filter? So let's take a second. Look at that. Negative. Around Christmas,
I made a video about my scanning setup, and I'm ashamed to say I haven't shot
and scanned a whole role with it yet. And even better, this guy
Dmitry, who has a scanning kit he designed and sells, saw that video and sent me one of his medium
format film scanning kits to test out. He sent me this kit, asked me to take
a video of it, not a YouTube video, but just to send him some footage of me
using it. I'm not getting paid for this. And if you're interested in the kit,
there is a non-affiliate link in the description. The cool thing about this is that this is the first time
I've scanned color film at home. I shoot a lot of black and white because it's simpler to develop
and simple to scan and invert.

I quickly realized that getting the colors right was going to be a bit of a chore,
so I downloaded Negative Lab Pro. It has two downsides. One, it doesn't work
on Apple Silicon Macs and natively, which kind of sucks. And I don't like
putting Rosetta on my system. The other downside
is that it's only available as a Lightroom plugin,
and I'm not a big fan of Lightroom. I do all of my raw
image conversion in Capture One. I find it handles color and skin tones
in particular much better than Lightroom. But regardless, Negative Lab
Pro did a great job converting the shot so I could export a TIFF
and bring it right back into Capture One. Looking at the shots,
I have to say I'm preferring the film shot with a proper scan. For my website, I had re-cropped the shot
like a 6x7 camera would, and doing the same on the film
shot lines them up pretty nicely.

Zooming in, I can tell there's motion blur
on the digital shot, which doesn't make sense,
because it's such a bright day. If I look at the metadata,
I can see that the shot is at F/9 and 1/30 of a second in aperture
priority mode. I'll give myself the benefit of the doubt that I was just quickly framing up
and not a complete idiot. I was a complete idiot. I was learning, okay, jeez,
cut me some slack. God, you guys are so mean. I was just a kid. I could get rid of the motion blur
if I was less lazy. But matching the grain on these
seems to get rid of most of it. Another thing that makes me lean towards
the film shot is that the sun is out. Obviously,
the sun had gone behind the cloud for the digital shot
and come out for the film. Looking back at the film now, it does
have that sort of Kramer Kenny Rogers.

Roasters vibe to it, which I think does
add a little bit to the humor of it. The guy looks hotter. He looks roastier, like a
window duck, if that makes sense. I think maybe this is funnier? It also gives a nice contrast
to the greenery. I remember struggling
with how flat and muddy the greenery looks,
so I separated it in Photoshop to try to like add some contrast within
just the greenery. I was also obsessed a little bit
with this desaturated cool, no yellows in the greens sort of vibe. Like very blue foliage,
which I feel like I've kind of outgrown. So in the end,
is the film shot actually better? Looking back at them, I kind of feel like
I prefer the film shot a little bit more. But the key thing is, is if. I never took the film shot, the digital
shot would still be in my portfolio. It would still be on my website,
and no one would be the wiser.

The film does not make or break the shot,
and what makes or breaks the shot is your eye, your vision,
how you hold a camera, how you include things
or exclude things from your frame to add humor or to add drama, chaos. Your vision. Not that you're using Portra 800
or some $40 roll of film. All of these things and ideas
are much bigger than the medium or the brand of the camera
you're shooting on. So why do I still shoot film
and why do I still defend film? Because to me, a fully manual film
SLR with black and white film is still one of the best photography
educations you can get. It has a pretty low barrier to entry. You can develop the film at home yourself. It's just an incredible exercise. There's no LCD to make you self-conscious
or distract you while you're shooting. There's no virtually endless memory cards
that allow you just spray and pray.

and pick off a few good shots, but never really understand
why they were good shots. Film makes you an incredibly conscious and present photographer,
and that's what I love. It's a process that teaches you
to make a photograph instead of take one. To repeat the cliche. In a world where we're experiencing events through a smartphone,
never really present, and then those photos end up uploaded
to a cloud that we're paying rent for to a corporation. And we'll never, ever
look back on those images. Film keeps you in the moment. The light that is on people's faces is what comes through the lens and hits
your eye as you're taking the shot. That's pretty special,
but that doesn't make digital not special. If you can take these ideas of a practice
of focusing on what you want to say, how you want to build
a body of work – a portfolio once you've built that creative practice,
you can go out.

And if you see a great composition,
and all you had was your smartphone, your voice would still come through. It's super depressing for me
to think about people letting a brand or medium
define their creative journey. I feel like it's disrespectful
to your creative core. It sort of disenfranchizes
it and gives all of the credit for your creative journey
to an external force. See, the people who actually matter
aren't the ones asking, “What camera did you take this on?”
Or asking technical details. They're the people who will respond
to the idea and the vision,
and the creative mind behind your shots. The people that matter care about ideas, that ability to change how people think is the most exciting thing about the creative process, present underneath, or like two-handed. Can you do a sweep? Sweep?

Film doesn't make an image special

Film doesn't make an image special