Film or Digital Images : The Passing of Analog Systems

When I was in college the big buzz in Media was "Which was better; Film or Digital images"?. My education consisted of learning to practice basic photography and processing, while also learning the new digital imaging. HDTV was just beginning to take prominence and I had the unusual position of learning my craft at the hand-off of image, from film to digital. There was quite a debate raging and after the last 10 years of that debate, digital has finally become the standard.

BUT
Is digital best? I don't think so. I believe that each medium has its merits. While it can be argued that film has been relegated to use only in high art, I feel that it still has a purpose and in some ways is quite superior. The pure image comes from film; it is not pixilated and all the edges are touching. We have become so used to looking at a digital image and seeing the artificial crispness, we see that as preferable over the film image. If we look at a film image we see all of the edges touching and that makes us perceive the image as blurry. I believe that the film image is a more organic or natural expression of the image. The soul of the image is found in film.

As a photographer I have defended the use of each medium because there are just too many instances where film is more appropriate. Whenever shooting weddings or any occasion of the heart, using film gives a softer focus and deeper shadows. It is definitely a more romantic version of the image. When I shoot a wedding I use two cameras, one film and one digital. Additionally, many film studios shoot on film and transfer to digital so in some cases film is still the standard. Of course the technology improves itself so quickly that soon the digital image will completely replace film and it will be able to re-create even the subtleties of film. However, it will never replace the thrill of putting photography paper into developer and watching that image appear like magic.