This article is simultaneously posted at Chicago Photobloggers.org, and is part of a series of articles I have planned.

A few months ago this article probably would have turned out very differently, that’s because a few months ago I didn’t own a digital camera. Well, that’s not entirely true; I owned a 2 megapixel point-and-shoot digital camera that I bought back in 2002. I don’t count it since I haven’t used it since 2005 or 2006 in favor of a number of film cameras.

When I got that digital camera back in 2002 I loved it. I hadn’t really used film cameras aside from an old 110 format film when I was a child and a few single use cameras. I took tens of thousands of photos with that camera, mainly because I could. Just put a memory card in the camera, shoot for a few hours, put the photos on a computer, rinse, repeat. There were absolutely no limit to how many photos could be taken, and after the initial cost of the camera there really aren’t any other costs. I loved the instant gratification too. When I first started my photoblog I would often take photos one night and post one of them the next day. Add the fact that the camera had a full manual mode where I could set the shutter speed, aperture, and ISO, and I had a great camera to learn photography on. The only thing I really didn’t like about it at the time was that it lacked any way to set the depth of field on photographs. I certainly wasn’t about to spend money on a DSLR at the time though.

Luckily my brother-in-law gave me a Nikon N70 (35mm film SLR) that he no longer needed. This had everything that my point-and-shoot digital had and I could create depth of field in the photograph. I remember the first roll I took with that camera; I was obsessed with having something in a photo be out of focus. The only thing this camera really lacked was the instant gratification that I had with the digital. It really didn’t bother me though. I could go shooting and then drop the film off at the shop a few blocks away. Then a few hours later, and sometimes overnight, I would pick up the film and scan it in to my computer. All in all, the process wasn’t much longer than the previous process. Of course I did have to finish a roll of film before I took it to the shop, but I usually tried to finish any rolls before being done shooting for the day. Film really grew on me, and I started buying more 35mm film cameras. I started to think that I would never move back to digital again.

This thought became more concrete when I bought a medium format film camera in 2008. Not only did this have everything that my 35mm cameras had, but the medium format negatives were roughly 4.5 times the size of a 35mm negative. Of course this comes at the expense of having only 10 shots per roll (my camera takes 6×7 sized negatives, results will vary from 4 to 16 shots based on camera) of film. By comparison, a roll of 35mm film can take 36 shots per roll, and a digital camera can take dozens or hundreds of photos per memory card.

In 2008 I also decided it would probably be cheaper to develop my own film. So I purchased some chemicals and supplies to develop film, furthering myself from digital even more. And just a few months ago a friend taught me how to develop color film. I enjoy developing film; it’s fun to control another step in the process. This extra control comes at the cost of waiting even longer between taking the photo and having it on the computer. I usually wait until I have about 6 or 8 rolls to develop before I bother mixing some chemicals to develop it; this can sometimes be weeks or months. This waiting period really makes digital cameras attractive; instant gratification is pretty nice.

And now after 2 years of developing my own film I have a digital camera and am enjoying the instant gratification. I can now take photos and see them on the computer the same day again. Only this time I also have depth of field and interchangeable lenses. Prior to owning the new DSLR I didn’t care for digital cameras at all. I’ve changed my tune quite a bit since then and now use my digital as much as, if not more than, my film cameras. I even bought a nice lens that I never would have thought about buying for my 35mm cameras. The only thing I worry about (constantly) is having a hard drive failure and losing all of my photos. Film is tangible, and I like tangible. If I have a hard drive failure I can just rescan the negatives. I’m attempting the calm my fears by backing up the photos on 3 different hard drives though.

So what is better, film or digital? I’m basing my decision on the fact that it’s not all about the end result, but the overall process. Photos aren’t my hobby, photography is. That includes all of the steps: finding a subject, taking the photo, developing the film, scanning the film, editing, and finally sharing the photo(s) that I like. Which is why film ultimately wins out over digital for me. That’s not to say I dislike my digital camera; I love it and it makes photography amazingly easy, but film is just more fun to use through the entire process.

I always assumed that the charm of iTunes, eMusic, and the rest of the online mp3 stores sprung up due to the fact that consumers really only liked the 1 or 2 songs they heard on the radio from an artist. I also assumed that this was due to the fact that major record labels actually put out albums with only 1 or 2 hit songs with a lot of filler. Any dedicated fan will go out and purchase the full album, but most people will simply purchase a couple songs and put them on their mp3 player.

iTunes LP is a fundamental shift in the way that iTunes has sold music in the past. Where before they sold single mp3s, they now plan on selling full albums with artwork, liner notes, videos, photos and other extras. The problem there is that if you’re clever enough to find Google and enter a few choice words into a search, it’s fairly simple to find album artwork, band photos and both music videos and concert videos; all for free. Now all we’re missing is the music and the liner notes. Oh, and the joy of handling a physical product and putting it on your record or CD player…

Are physical products really a thing of the past? Not according to the shelves of records and CDs that I have in my living room, and also not according to the many independent record labels that still put out LPs and CDs. Even Best Buy has started carrying LPs. I would much rather hold an LP in my hands and have a large copy of the artwork. Files on a computer are just so intangible. They get tossed into a folder within a folder within a folder and they get lost in the shuffle. A single click and they’re gone; a hard drive failure and they’re gone. If I do really want to put an LP on my mp3 player though, it’s fairly simple to make a digital copy. And if I’m too lazy for that, record labels often include a way to download the album as mp3s when you purchase it.

So if you buy the actual LP you get everything that iTunes LP gives you plus a physical product that you can hold in your hands, put on your record player, hang on your wall, or use to play frisbee with your friends. iTunes LP, while an interesting idea initially, seems completely useless in a market where physical products still exist.

During the month of August 2009 I am displaying 18 photos at the Arlington Heights Memorial Library in Arlington Heights, IL. The photos will be displayed on a wall near the checkout desk (by the Dunton Avenue entrance).

The library is located at:
500 North Dunton Avenue
Arlington Heights, IL 60004

Get directions from Google Maps

Come out and see the photos if you have time. I can also meet you at the library (I live just a few blocks away) and give more details on each photo if you’d like, just let me know ahead of time via e-mail (john@photoentropy.com) Note that I work weekdays during the day.

The hours for the library are:
Monday – Friday: 9am – 10pm
Saturday: 9am – 5:30pm
Sunday: 12pm – 5:30pm

And now for the sales pitch. I don’t have room in my small apartment to store these prints, so please purchase one. Prices start at $60 and include framing. For more information, go to http://www.photoentropy.com/ahml or send me an e-mail me at john@photoentropy.com.

After a 2 month-long lull in photo taking I finally developed film from 3 different recent photoing sessions. I now have around 50 photos that I don’t know what to do with. I’m already posted on my photoblog for the next 2 months because I figured I wouldn’t have much time in the coming months with the pending wedding and honeymoon. I could put them on flickr, but I really don’t like flickr. That’s another story though, which I’ll write about when I have time. It’s a shame, but I think the photos will have to wait until August or September before they hit the blog. It’s nice to have a backlog sometimes, but it would also be nice to be able to post photos closer to the date I took them. The downside of using film…

The blog is back again. I was planning on resurrecting it and I figured since I put up a link to this a week ago with the new design on Photoentropy I should probably bring it back soon. I plan on actually writing here on occasion, as long as I can find the time.

Eventually I’m going to build out this site a bit more as well, so look forward to more updates in the future.

Also new today is a little addition to the camera archive pages on Photoentropy. I put a photo and a little information on each of the cameras I use. Thanks to the fiancée for the idea and thanks to jQuery for making it so easy to do.