Prior to “going digital” in 2005, I only used film [was there anything else?]. Fuji Velvia/Provia for color and Kodak TriX/Trimax for B&W were my preferred choices, though I did shoot color negative film as well. I used a Nikon F3 always, and then went fancy and got myself a Nikon 
F5 which I ended up using just a couple of years. When I needed flash, I used a Nikon SB16A with the F3 and a SB80DX with the F5, and almost always used these with a cord to get them off-camera. All calculations for flash distance and camera aperture were done the “old fashioned way” as there was no TTL option with the F3/SB16A combo and limited auto-options with the F5/SB80DX anyway. So what am I getting at here? A reflection on what it was like back then in the “dark ages” and what it is like for me now in the digital era. What did I learn, by using manual cameras and film, that I might not have if I started straight into digital photography? What would my photography skills be, if I had started with digital and then upgraded to a manual film camera?
F5 which I ended up using just a couple of years. When I needed flash, I used a Nikon SB16A with the F3 and a SB80DX with the F5, and almost always used these with a cord to get them off-camera. All calculations for flash distance and camera aperture were done the “old fashioned way” as there was no TTL option with the F3/SB16A combo and limited auto-options with the F5/SB80DX anyway. So what am I getting at here? A reflection on what it was like back then in the “dark ages” and what it is like for me now in the digital era. What did I learn, by using manual cameras and film, that I might not have if I started straight into digital photography? What would my photography skills be, if I had started with digital and then upgraded to a manual film camera?Dark-ages Film to High-tech Digital:
The most important aspect I learned, from a bit of hard work, experimentation, reading, and a lot of mistakes and disappointments, was that I am in control of the entire process from seeing – to the click – to the print. The camera was not in control of anything. All mistakes were mine. All successes were too. I learned to work the controls without “thinking” of the technical aspect of photography, thanks
to the great books by John Shaw and Moose Peterson [there were no blogs and real-time online tutorials by these great photographers back then unfortunately]. Control over exposure had to be burned into the subconscious and then used by “second nature”. John Shaw’s insistent and repeated instruction was: learn the technical first and then switch your brain onto the creative side of photography and see the light, concentrate on making a good photo, look at the composition in the viewfinder, take your time, slow down and see the relationships between 
elements, and use these to create a final image. There was no post-processing to be done other than dodging and burning in Black and White. No post-processing ‘sharpening’, no cropping [this was reserved for farmers only], no overlaying, no color enhancements, no color-cast correction once the click was made. Once an image was recorded it was done and it was final. No preview. No erasure. No pressure. The developed film came back from the lab in a day or several days – it took time to do it well. One waited. In anticipation. All successes were gloated over. Failures reviewed and a ‘post-mortem’ performed, conclusions [of the failures] filed away somewhere in the brain for later reference. The developed film was viewed with a loupe on the light-table, marked, encased in plastic slip-covers, filed systematically in thick spiral-bound folders. Was it difficult to locate a particular shot without the benefit of a computerized search engine? Not really. The index cards on the folders were very easy to read! I also remembered a lot more back then, than I can or do now [I now depend on and expect the laptop computer to safely store stuff in its memory and spit it out in a nanosecond when asked. Why tax ones own memory?!].
The most important aspect I learned, from a bit of hard work, experimentation, reading, and a lot of mistakes and disappointments, was that I am in control of the entire process from seeing – to the click – to the print. The camera was not in control of anything. All mistakes were mine. All successes were too. I learned to work the controls without “thinking” of the technical aspect of photography, thanks
to the great books by John Shaw and Moose Peterson [there were no blogs and real-time online tutorials by these great photographers back then unfortunately]. Control over exposure had to be burned into the subconscious and then used by “second nature”. John Shaw’s insistent and repeated instruction was: learn the technical first and then switch your brain onto the creative side of photography and see the light, concentrate on making a good photo, look at the composition in the viewfinder, take your time, slow down and see the relationships between 
elements, and use these to create a final image. There was no post-processing to be done other than dodging and burning in Black and White. No post-processing ‘sharpening’, no cropping [this was reserved for farmers only], no overlaying, no color enhancements, no color-cast correction once the click was made. Once an image was recorded it was done and it was final. No preview. No erasure. No pressure. The developed film came back from the lab in a day or several days – it took time to do it well. One waited. In anticipation. All successes were gloated over. Failures reviewed and a ‘post-mortem’ performed, conclusions [of the failures] filed away somewhere in the brain for later reference. The developed film was viewed with a loupe on the light-table, marked, encased in plastic slip-covers, filed systematically in thick spiral-bound folders. Was it difficult to locate a particular shot without the benefit of a computerized search engine? Not really. The index cards on the folders were very easy to read! I also remembered a lot more back then, than I can or do now [I now depend on and expect the laptop computer to safely store stuff in its memory and spit it out in a nanosecond when asked. Why tax ones own memory?!].
So whats so special and magical about film? Difficult to tell the difference, which images on this page have been photographed on film and which are digital captures. One would be hard pressed to tell the difference here. But look at a full sized print [24" x 36"] from film and a print from digital and it can be obvious. Which is better? For me, both! So, whats the fuss about? None, that I can think of.The “switch” to digital was pretty nice though and I remember what startled me the first day I used my shiny new D2Hs – the instant I hit the shutter there it was – a preview of the capture on the LCD display! I actually was startled. Did not expect it even though I know it would be there.
Digital to Film route?
This would be a really interesting move! Especially if one had no experience with film and MF cameras. Seriously. One would have already learned a great deal because digital gives instant feedback via the preview of the image, the histogram, the “blinkies” [overexposure] in the LCD display, the knowledge of color-casts [White Balance in digital] why they happen and what. The photography learning-curve is pretty quick with digital.
Would anyone want to move from Digital to Film? I can’t answer that in general but for myself the answer is a probable MAYBE. More like a NO actually. Film cameras and the whole process of developing the film then viewing the tiny pieces of developed film, test-prints to review these further or scan each and reviewing them on a computer. Too much work involved. Am now spoilt and too lazy!
Today's Sparrow. With a Nikon D3 + Nikkor 300mm f/4 AFD hand held.
Digital images: 1, 3 and 5 [D2Hs / D3].
Film: 2 and 3 [Fuji Provia with F3 and SB16A].
The paintings are by Alka Mathur. # 2 and 3 are from 1998 or thereabouts.
.