I’ve decided to ease up on shooting film for a bit. I’m having a hard time coming to grips with shooting a medium that I’m paying money for, devoting an large amount of time to, and not able to exploit fully. I realized the other day that most of my gripes with digital files come from some odd default color balances in Adobe and Canon software that is fairly easy to dial out - you just have to have a wide color gamut monitor and a critical eye. That said, files from a digital camera are consistently sharp and retain excellent dynamic range - qualities that film possesses, no doubt, but to get scans on the same level as files from my 1Ds would require a huge investment in a scanner/repro equipment that I simply can’t make right now. I suppose that if I wasn’t shooting with the intention to display things on a computer this wouldn’t matter, however that isn’t the case.
I’d like to start doing things with a bit more purpose, direction, and conceptual and technical rigor than I’m doing them at now. Working with film is hampering this process.
I should just say that I think film is beautiful in it’s own unique way, but it’s not the only intrinsically beautiful way to take a photograph.
I’ve been shooting 35mm mostly as a reactionary measure against the very clean digital look I normally like. I’ve also been inspired to shoot it by a lot of people online. I like how 35mm pictures look like vignettes in a sense, but I don’t know if approaching photography in that way is good for my work. I’ve spent most of 2013 fucking around, doing nothing. My photographs reflect that. Are photographs of fucking around, doing nothing bettered by being on film and rendered as downsized, oversharpened scans displayed on the internet?