Hybrid Theory

90% of my photography is done as a hobby. My “real job” is a primary-level teacher. I photograph almost purely to satisfy myself. As such, I can look the digital world in the eyes and say “Screw you, I’m shooting film. Not only that, but I’m going to shoot black & white film which I will then perform what amounts to alchemical magic on and transform the film into photographs.“

What I mean is, because it’s a hobby I have full control over the medium of capture and of final presentation.

But there does exist that 10% in which I am taking photographs in a more “commercial” capacity. There are times when someone else’s satisfaction is paramount to my own because they are investing in me and expecting a reasonable product. This being the 21st century and “digital” being the throw-around word of the day I am almost always asked to shoot “digitally” even though it is my personal work on film that typically brings me new clients. Here are the reasons I usually get:

  • The client needs the photos “as soon as possible”.
  • The client will be using the photos digitally (i.e. put on the web or other digital media).
  • The client needs the “flexibility” of having digital files.
  • The client wants the photos on CD/DVD for archival purposes.
My happy response to these requirements is usually “Fine! I’ll shoot on film, then.”
And then I calm the client down and explain to them that they can still have all of their requirements satisfied and I can still shoot with film. Film can be processed and high resolution batch scans of the negatives made to CD by virtually any modern lab in less then an hour. Typically, there is less post-processing time needed with film-based images (less color and exposure adjustments), so that “lost hour” is balanced out. Burning a new disc for the client takes no more time then if all the photos had come from a digital camera, but as a bonus the client also gets a “hard copy” with the negatives.
Obviously, this doesn’t apply to very time-critical applications such as photojournalism, or in situations where the client has a marketing/creative team standing over your shoulder waiting to analyze and make suggestions on every single image you take, like in some studio sessions. But for most of what I do it works fine…especially when the client finds out that with less post-processing time involved it won’t cost them more. ;)




Pass the Word!
SubscribeBloglinesBlogmarksDiggdel.icio.usFacebookRedditStumbleUponTechnorati

Possibly Related Posts:


November 17th, 2008 in Photography, The Life of Brian | tags: , ,

Comments (3)

teohjitkhiamNovember 17th, 2008 at 10:30 pm

“Film can be processed and high resolution batch scans of the negatives made to CD by virtually any modern lab in less then an hour.”

Dang, Brian. To the best of my knowledge, that doesn’t work here in Malaysia. Maybe the market in Taiwan can sustain such a photo lab, but I have yet to see of such here. But, hey, I am glad and happy that at least some photographers still have the satisfaction of shooting in film and delivering the goods pronto; commercially no less!

TomNovember 18th, 2008 at 2:55 am

Cool. I try, because film is soooo much nicer than digital. I can easily develop the negatives shot the same day, and maybe even get prints out that same day too. I’ve yet to scan my prints (I have 17 in my binder that I need to do) because I can’t find a good scanner. I tried Rite Aid, but their scanner was broken. haha.
Where do you recommend, if any? I wonder if they’re also here in the US

PS: nice new layout. looks cool.

BrianNovember 18th, 2008 at 11:11 am

@teohjitkhiam: Any modern lab is equipped with either a Fuji Frontier or Kodak Noritsu processing machine. They will process film and batch scan the negs in one go. What to the labs in Malaysia use if they don’t use Fuji or Kodak machines?

@Tom: Film requires a lot less work to get it to “look right”. In reality, choosing film has more to do with timeline then anything else.

Leave a comment

Your comment