I first picked up a film camera in 2012 when my brother had dusted off our father’s old film cameras. At the time, I was shooting with a DSLR and thought it would be fun to try that analog process. Initially, it was simply to learn the fundamentals—ISO, shutter speed, and aperture. And what better than a manual film camera to understand the exposure triangle?
Film photography also forced me to slow down. With 36 exposures (or less) per roll, you have to think twice before pressing the shutter. There is also no instant feedback and no screen to check. You then have to wait for the roll to be back from the lab to see if you got it right and be happy with yourself or to be frustrated because you messed it up, which, in the beginning, happened quite a lot. But it’s all part of the process.
What began as a technical exercise soon turned into a philosophy. Unlike digital, where my editing style constantly evolves (coupled with the notion of never really being happy with an edit ), film exposures remain timeless. I never feel the urge to rework a negative years later—it simply holds its place in time.
Film stocks are like different brushes. Each has its character, and I choose them based on the subject and location rather than relying too much on post-processing to shape the final image. Digital, on the other hand, offers limitless possibilities in editing. Both have their place, but film offers something digital often struggles to replicate—an inherent, organic quality straight out of the camera.