사진 필름과 디지털, 그리고 크리에이티브 비전

### 필름 대 디지털: 사진을 진정으로 특별하게 만드는 요소
* 📷 10여 년 전, 한 사진작가는 사진을 특별하게 만드는 데 있어 **카메라나 매체가 아닌 창의적인 접근 방식과 비전**이 중요하다는 사실을 깨달았습니다.
* 🎞 2008년 여름 파티에서 사진작가는 **디지털 카메라와 중형 필름 카메라**로 자신이 마음에 드는 구도를 포착했습니다. 놀랍게도 그는 **디지털 사진을 더 선호**했고, "정말 중요한 것은 사진가의 접근 방식과 안목, 창의적인 의도"라는 것을 깨닫게 되었습니다.
* 💡 이러한 통찰을 통해 사진 작가는 **필름과 디지털이 상호 배타적이지 않으며, 둘 중 하나를 선택해야 할 필요는 없다는 것**을 이해할 수 있었습니다.
* 🔍 최근 중형 필름 스캔 키트를 받은 후 이 사진작가는 파티에서 촬영한 동일한 장면의 네거티브 필름을 다시 스캔했습니다. **네거티브 랩 프로를 사용한 적절한 스캔과 색상 보정**을 통해 그는 필름 사진에 더 가까워진 자신을 발견했습니다.
* 🌟 핵심은 **"필름이 샷을 만들거나 망치지 않으며, 샷을 만들거나 망치는 것은 여러분의 눈, 시야, 카메라를 잡는 방법, 프레임에서 사물을 포함하거나 제외하는 방법"**이라는 것입니다.
* 📚 흑백 필름을 사용한 완전 수동 필름 SLR이 최고의 사진 교육 중 하나라고 믿기 때문에 사진가는 계속해서 **필름을 촬영**하고 **필름을 옹호**합니다. 필름은 놀라울 정도로 의식적이고 현재적인 사진작가로 만들어 줍니다.
* 🌈 궁극적으로 가장 중요한 것은 창의적으로 말하고자 하는 내용과 작품의 구성 방식에 집중하는 것입니다. 진정으로 중요한 사람들은 **여러분의 아이디어, 비전, 창의적인 마인드에 반응하는 사람들**입니다.

영화 제작자이자 사진작가인 제시는 카메라나 필름 선택보다 사진가의 비전이 더 중요하다는 것을 깨닫고 사진에 대한 접근 방식을 바꿨습니다.

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

Jesse Senko

10년 반이 제 사진 여정에 미친 영향

사진을 특별하게 만드는 것은 카메라의 종류가 아니라 사진작가의 창의적인 접근 방식과 비전입니다.

연사는 오래된 필름 카메라를 사용하다가 디지털 기술을 받아들이는 등 수년에 걸쳐 필름과 디지털 사진에 대한 여정을 발전시켜 왔습니다.

필름 프로세스에 대한 애정에도 불구하고 디지털 사진에 대한 선호도는 놀랍게도 분명하게 드러났습니다.

사진가는 사용하는 카메라나 매체보다 창의적인 의도가 더 중요하다는 것을 깨닫습니다.

이러한 깨달음은 사진가가 필름과 디지털의 논쟁을 넘어 브랜드 충성도를 무시할 수 있게 해줍니다.

전통적인 논쟁과 기업의 영향력에 얽매이지 않고 실험과 창의적인 표현에 초점을 맞추게 됩니다.

Dmitry는 테스트용으로 중형 필름 스캔 키트를 무상으로 보내주었고, 덕분에 집에서 컬러 필름을 스캔하는 첫 경험을 하게 되었습니다.

네거티브 랩 프로를 사용한 컬러 변환 프로세스는 Apple 실리콘 맥과 라이트룸 플러그인이라는 한계에도 불구하고 효과적이었습니다.

초기에는 모션 블러로 인한 몇 가지 문제에도 불구하고 필름 촬영은 정렬, 그레인 매칭, 햇빛 포착 면에서 디지털 촬영보다 선호도가 높았습니다.

필름 사진이 구도와 시각에 미치는 영향

연사는 필름 사진이 작업에 미친 영향에 대해 이야기하며, 사진의 품질은 카메라나 필름의 종류보다 시각과 구도에 더 큰 영향을 받는다고 강조합니다.

그들은 필름 SLR이 수동 프로세스와 디지털 방해 요소가 없다는 점에서 가치 있는 사진 교육을 제공한다고 주장합니다.

필름 사용은 사진의 구도와 마음가짐에 대한 기술을 향상시키는 방법으로 옹호됩니다.

영화 촬영이 창작 과정에 미치는 영향

필름 사진은 사진을 찍는 순간과 사진을 만드는 예술을 강조하면서 의식적이고 현재적인 접근 방식을 가르칩니다.

사진가들이 사용하는 도구나 매체보다는 창의적인 비전에 집중하도록 장려합니다.

사진의 진정한 가치는 기술적인 디테일이나 사용된 장비보다는 아이디어를 전달하고 감정을 불러일으키는 능력에 있습니다.