I'm a little bummed I haven't received any shoe cam comments yet. Tough crowd!

@zakforce2572

2 күн бұрын

Makes me think of the old joke about putting mirrors on the toes of your shoes

@petercofrancesco9812

2 күн бұрын

I'm only interested in women feet pics. Sorry.

@art_means_artificial

2 күн бұрын

I hate all those /diots who think they are MEGA ARTIST with film hahahha. NICK KNIGHT! TIM WALKER make images with digital PHASE ONE! thats POWER

@PeterbFree

Күн бұрын

I just understood, very funny 😂

@dungbeetle.

Күн бұрын

Yeah, see, no one wants to admit they know what it's for. But I'm not worried - it's to check for rust spots under vehicles, right?

Film will never make your images special if you are using film for a mediocre image. On the other hand, film has/gives a special look. It’s NOT a special wand 🪄 A pig with lipstick is still a pig.

I think all of us need to be reminded from time to time that it’s not about the camera, it’s about the photographer. Always appreciative of how thoughtful your content is, Jesse.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Thanks, Henry!

@art_means_artificial

2 күн бұрын

@jessesenko I hate all those /diots who think they are MEGA ARTIST with film hahahha. NICK KNIGHT! TIM WALKER make images with digital PHASE ONE! thats POWER

I've been told so many times my camera takes good pictures but until we have truly AI sentient cameras, my cameras don't press the shutter button.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Woah Chris, your comment was so good! What kind of keyboard do you use??? :) as always, thanks for watching, Chris!

@chris_sparrows

2 күн бұрын

@@jessesenko It's a digital keyboard on my phone, so, you know.

@mrca2004

Күн бұрын

A camera TAKES pictures. On a tripod, with the timer in full auto mine will take a sharp, well exposed image of what is in front of it. But a machine doesn't know what your are trying to express and use it 's tools accordingly any more than you keyboard knows what you want to say and can make literature without you. My keyboards have sat here for 25 years and have yet to produce a novel on their own.

@chris_sparrows

23 сағат бұрын

@@mrca2004 Fully agree, except it can't set the timer on its own.

I went through my film phase back in 2012 and the same question you pose, "is film just a really expensive instagram filter?" changed my relationship with photography!

I’m dying, Picasso sponsored by squarespace is the best way you could make that point. Such a funny and effective line

i like the warmth

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Me too!

My recomendations brought me here and I'm staying! These videos are really my cup of tea. The look, the topics, the gear, the filmmaking, the music, the humor. Spot on! 👌

@jessesenko

20 сағат бұрын

Thank you! Appreciate it!

The fact that the old low tier crop camera with a toy lens is basically on par with a medium format film, tells us a lot about film

@brankobelfranin8815

11 сағат бұрын

It all depend on what you are shooting

Glad to see you back. I can’t see the hype with film. If you want to be limited by 36 photos… shoot raw and buy a small SD card. I saw someone you know packing a bag of film stock for a photo shoot. So limited, who? Not him. If you just like it, awesome, but can’t sell it as a fix all solution. As a learning tool... You’ll learn a lot, but imagine what you can achieve with painting. My first camera was a Konica Minolta, that I’ll own and will work forever. But there are enough things to make you anxious, waiting a few days to see if you messed up your family vacation photos should not be one of them. Again, glad to see you.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

It’s a very expensive analog Instagram filter for some, and those people are missing the point… the process of film. Film is like therapy for me, but I’m pretty pragmatic about how incredible digital photography is. Thanks for watching!

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

I’m also curious about “who I know” lol

@AtentieCadMere

2 күн бұрын

@@jessesenko I just assumed that if you knew Matti, you also were acquainted with McKinnon.

@AtentieCadMere

2 күн бұрын

@@jessesenko Like grinding coffee, and making your own camera gear. Thanks for sharing, I'll search for a way to slow down some processes.

As an artist, film may or may not make your image special. Concerning art, many times its the consumers making the determination of special, with some artist's not even needing that, because they create with what makes them feel special, and let the chips fall where they may with the consumers of the art.

@mrca2004

Күн бұрын

I liked what a fellow professional said... I don't care if they like it so long as they buy it.

I shoot film when I want to give my images that film look.

@mrca2004

Күн бұрын

An image that is just "realistic" and sterile. I use different film stocks and formats to match my vision. It adds to the fun.

@romani8494

18 сағат бұрын

Just shoot digital and diminish the quality to the film level.

@user-eh8jv2em2o

16 сағат бұрын

​@@romani8494 google "digital hp5 vs analog hp5". Left is digital with "emulation", right is real film. Not bad, eh? Just because some disposable film camera snaps (shot with direct flash) that were printed on 15x10cm then scanned look low-quality doesn't mean film in general equals "low quality".

@Narsuitus

15 сағат бұрын

@@romani8494 I have not found any digital that I can afford that matches the quality of my medium format and large format images.

That sunbathing fella is me waiting this channel to take over.

I totally agree, I think while film isn't necessarily better, often times constraints make better art, sometimes being forced to do things while not having all the convenience digital provides can make you approach things in a different way.

Leaving the border visible can throw off NLP when converting. It's better to crop out the border and then uncrop after converting.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Thanks! I need to play around with it some more for sure

I remember back when i started using film back in 2018-2019 some youtuber said: “using film is not a bandaid to make your pics look better.” That made rethink film photography from an elevated artform to just another photography tool, and shot the heck out of it lol.

Keep making stuff your channel has inspired me to just shoot my own way and your diy nature inspired my current project

People who can't take a decent picture to save their life obsess about stupid gimmicks like filters and "film look"

This video has such a refreshing artistic perspective on photography. I love it

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Thanks for watching!

Never been let down. Keep on sharing, Jesse

I really find the film shot much better, but then again it depends so much on post processing... Anyway, it doesn't take anything away from a really good video!

Your eye is the first camera you need before you touch the physical camera. After I learned to train it, my images feel like they could be felt and the people around me could feel them. That's all that matters :)

Aight, hear me out, betacam tape. All videographers should still learn via betacam tape. Why? BECAUSE I HAD TO!

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

lol. I ALMOST included a shot of us setting up all the beta tapes like dominoes at the agency I worked at when I mentioned it in this vid. They went around the whole floor of our downtown tower. We were such focused employees.

Loyal to yourself and change over loyalty to a brand... well said and backed 100%.

Dude i love this channel so much like im not even exaggerating i involuntarily smiled when i saw this in my recommended

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Awesome! Seriously means a lot!

Cinematographer Steve Yedlin did an amazing deep dive on this, and this video confirms his thesis, that the look of the final image isn't dictated by the format it was shot on, but how that data was processed or the post pipeline it went through. And that the differences between formats and camera brands are technical, not aesthetic.

@mrca2004

Күн бұрын

BS. See the movie Oppenheimer shot on medium format film. Compare it to fat man and little boy shot on digital. Night an day. MF film looks like you can walk into the image. Sorry, digital "medium format" even for 50 grand for a body is crop medium format. In film 645 is the smalled mf format and digital is 1/2 to 2/3 that. The look of mf is you get closer with a longer lens. Instead of a 135 mm for headshots at 7' with digital, I use a 250 mm with 67. It produces a subtle but different aesthetic. Now the measurebators can't measure it so they deny it exists. Same with lenses that produce high inter tonal contrast. Can't measure that so they say it's a myth. I hope they are my competitors.

@kraftpunk6654

23 сағат бұрын

​@@mrca2004 Your response doesn't even disprove what i'm saying. I'm talking about the aesthetics of an image like color, contrast and highlight rolloff. You're talking about format sizes, this is different, that is a technical difference, nothing to do with aesthetics of the format. The field of view of an image is ultimately dictated by lens, sensor/format size is only part of it, it has nothing to do with the technology. Medium format digital can literally produce the same field of view.

@kraftpunk6654

23 сағат бұрын

@@mrca2004 Also, you mentioned about digital "medium format" camera being crop medium format. The Alexa LF (if that's what you're referring to) has a full frame Vista Vision sensor, it's not medium format. It's equivalent to 8 perf 35mm film.

Jesse, loving the quality of what you've been putting out. Don't feel rushed to get new vids out, just keep bringing the quality. All the best to ya mate!

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Thank you! Appreciate it! The bigger numbers kinda spook me! I don’t feel so anonymous anymore

Interesting point. I feel like on what the picture was taken on only has a small part on what makes an image special. What really makes an image special is how you the artist decided to take it. After all I believe photography is just a way of how the person holding the camera sees the world through many aspects of photography we know today.

I grew up at the frankenstein-time of having analog film-cameras that were electronic. I.e. Electronic metering, auto flash etc. So I never needed to learn the ins and out of a true manual camera. Today I enjoy my full frame mirrorless camera. But I understand exposure, composition and run it manually as it gets me the shot I want. The speed and agility of the camera gives me the ability to keep precious memories of my kid. But it's still important to learn about composition and purpose of a shot - not just spray and pray. Someone once told me that you can have the "film experience on your digital camera" by simply formatting your SD Card to only allow 30-40 images on it. Works wonders when your digital image counter is that low. Keeps the "pressure on" without the hassle and cost of film. Thanks for keeping my mind critical and provoking thoughts of the "everyday stuff".

@mrca2004

23 сағат бұрын

My favorite camera of 15, at least in 35 mm, my nikon f6 film camera nikon sold until OCTOBER 2020! Auto focus, dead on matrix metering, 1/8000 shutter, best view finder I own, 5 fps power winding, has aperture and shutter dials like my d850. Run and gun, street, it's a dream.

@jessesenko

20 сағат бұрын

When I was starting out a photographer I looked up to told me to take the camera out and just find compositions. Take one shot or don't even worry about it. Just study framings, walk around an object in you want to photograph and process how the light/angle/frame dictates what works for you.

It's crazy that you mention the Mavica - there's a local car meet that I go to every Tuesday and one of the hosts shoots on a Mavica. One of the coolest cameras I've seen!

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Amazing. I would love to see it out in the wild

I bought a Mavica too. Lots of fun. Haven't used film since.

Or the significant difference in focal length being that the film image is less compressed. I mean, that's why I like the digital version better.

A tip for negative lab Pro that took me way too long to realize, crop your image and then convert the negative. Saves you a lot of time trying to get the white balance correct. NLP is pretty awesome

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Awesome! Thanks for the tip. Just starting to figure it out.

I like how you brought up the point about using analog cameras. I find that there is something about going to the very basics that grounds you as a photographer and gives your brain a chance to think. It’s easy to spray and pray with digital. Painful when you miss the shot with BW medium format film. I learn more from my mistakes with film than I do with digital. I also get more wins with digital though too.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Keep pushing for those wins!

About 15 years ago, I took a snapshot of my dog with an Olympus OM-10 that I bought brand used in 1988. I don’t know why I didn’t use the Nikon D70 that I already had, I might have been running a roll of film through the OM-10 to see if it still worked. Anyway, the dog picture was awesome, and I decided to enter it into a juried show. Except the juried show required the entries to be in digital format. Instead of doing something sensible like scanning the image, I got out my D70 and reshot. Yes, the D70 image was a bit crunchier than the buttery smooth film image. But the soul of the image was the same, and the jury didn’t know or care that I had another, smoother image in my back pocket. They accepted the image into the show. I still have the print on my wall. I have no idea if the print is from the film or digital image. It really doesn’t matter.

@jessesenko

9 сағат бұрын

Love it. I’m sure the dog was impressed by the film and sparkled just a little more for you :)And my OM-1 has been calling my name from the shelf for the past few days. Maybe I’ll pull it out this weekend. Has half a roll in it from last summer. Hope the seals are good!

All this time subscribed and never been let down.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Thanks Thor!

Would love a video on composition. What are things you love to do

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

It’ll be a lot of “this looks good. oh wait, what about this?”

@MrIantodd

Күн бұрын

@@jessesenko yeah I’m for that

The film shot looks better… imo. Great work 👍🏼

Ahhh, the debate that will never die. You're right, both are great and both are valid...though I don't think that anything I shot on film holds any special reverence or experience of feeling "more intentional" or anything when I look at those photos - when I look at the photos, even as the creator of them, I just see a photo I either like or don't like. I feel pretty unconcerned about the gear/process factoring in to how I feel about the actual photo in the end. Is music made/played with an acoustic guitar better than music made/played with an electric guitar? There's no one definitively, universally true answer to that kind of question.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

100%

As a passionate analog shutter-bug, I have far more respect for a fine, artisanal old-world darkroom photographer-printer, than any diligent and meticulous computer nerd.

@mrca2004

Күн бұрын

In 2000 I started seeing the artists in a photo group I was in gradually leave the group as it was infiltrated by computer geeks looking for a new "computer game." They were numbers people, engineers, accountants, computer geeks who demanded images be made and judged by the numbers. Here's a clue, a spread sheet of blue print isn't art. They demanded lenses have no vignetting, no CA and in no time the tubes were filled with up to 22 pieces of glass instead of 6 or 7. Little wonder folks prefer older lenses that have high micro contrast, especially for b&w that is just contrast, and 3D rendering, ie zeiss pop or leica look. Not flat muddy images. They don't know what they don't know.

@jessesenko

20 сағат бұрын

I like photography that speaks to me, and there are nerds on both sides (not a terrible thing)... just reading the comments on this vid, there are a lot of angry people wanting to enforce rules... mostly, i feel bad for the people studying the sharpness or the vignetting, or conversely the softness or halation, without looking at the stupid picture. 🤷

@mrca2004

19 сағат бұрын

@@jessesenko Like in the movie Pirates of the Caribbean,, they aren't really rules, they're more like guidelines.

Like anything aesthetic, its a very personal opinion, but for me, a great photograph made with film almost always looks 'better' than digital, and no one has quite described the reason why that resonates with me. But there is an organic look, somehow less overtly 3D. The closest analogy I can think of is watching The Hobbit at 24fps versus 48fps, where one looks more filmic (I know, its shot digitally) than the other. The second looks 'too' real. Hyperreal. Of course, it can be a very subtle difference depending on the subject matter. And a bad photo is a bad photo, regardless.

I loved my Pentax 6x7 and large format camera but you can make any digital image look like film. The resolution in a mid range slr is better than film now.

I've never bought into the idea of shooting a certain medium or gear so that it "makes" me or forces me to do something. That's the last 'feature' I would ever want from my gear or medium. Yes, large format is slow. Yes, film is expensive so spray and pray is costlier. But a wealthy photographer with a Nikon F6 can spray and pray all day long. And there is nothing about a digital camera that _forces_ me into sloppy habits. That's on me, not the gear. I love that film is making a comeback. I like what a lot of people are doing with it. But the constant need to justify using film with dubious claims about image quality, "look", soul, je ne sais quo, etc ring hollow. Likewise with the need to put down modern gear. If film was "all that" there wouldn't be this constant need to justify it. And doing so seems to hint at some sort of insecurity and doubt about it. I think people should shoot film because that's what they want to do. There doesn't need to be any other justification.

I agree totally and it irritates me that a hashtag #filmsnotdead instantly gets an Instagram post about 100 more likes that a digital shot regardless of any inherent artistic merit. I've done both film and digital and it's the image that counts. The famous photographer Stephen Shore (greatest images on 10x8 film) had an instagram account - and all his shots were digital - a commenter there was saying how amazing his shots were and was it the 10x8 ? He replied no it was an iPhone!

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Haha. His work is so great. I will generally start tagging everything with that hashtag because, as a statement, it’s generally true, even if the post is digital.

There’s sort of a cliche that limits enable creativity. A lot of digital cameras are functionally unlimited. The very top end cameras from Sony and Nikon have capabilities that I know I could never use. I’m taking pictures of things I see in my daily life, a lot of pictures of my kids. I use film. It operates at a human scale. I have a digital camera, and I might buy another one. But I don’t need things to be perfect.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Sounds like you’re having fun exploring your different processes. The limits are fantastic. Lots of people buy gear on hypothetical extreme use-cases. Thanks for sharing.

REBEL XTi!!!! Oh, man, I used that thing professionally for years. Had a bunch of other Canon Dslr's to grab at any moment, but that little xti was my go to for some reason. Good stuff.

@jessesenko

9 сағат бұрын

That was a big one for me. My first “real” dslr. Got me enough gigs to save up for a 5dmkii. Thanks for watching, Keith!

Definitly always more about the person shooting not the camera or medium. I do however think shooting film a couple times at least if you have the opportunity can help develop your skills. It’s a good exercise, slows you dont and makes you more conscious about conditions and light etc.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Yep. Love the slowness.

You choose a medium that suits your creative process and complements the photographed subject. I don't know who told you that Film, or for that matter Digital make anything special!!

Of course, once a negative is digitised it definitlely loses much of it's beautiful and unique qualities. However, if developed in the darkroom and printed in the darkroom then I feel there is no question this organic and human process is far more lovely

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Yes I miss darkroom printing, but not sure I’ll ever get back to it. I mourn my printed portfolio, and that when I share my work it’s in a vastly reduced, online form. My website portfolio pays the bills, but would love to get in front of people with prints again.

@kevinslaney486

Күн бұрын

@@jessesenko Same here my friend. Your video tells the truth, it is ultimately the image that counts, but the magic of seeing the image appear in the tray and realising it's a good one a wondeful experience as a photographer. All the best

That title really needs saying. I see so many film shooters who seem to think the very fact they shot on film imbues their work with some sort of interest that isn't in the frame. At its worst, I see some treating these film shots as if they're more real than digital somehow, more artistic, more intrinsically gallery-worthy. That said, I do prefer the film scan in your video, I think mostly because of the gentler highlights, which was certainly more of an issue with digital back when you took this shot.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

100%. And yes I prefer the film too. Ill keep playing around with it and announce that its film every time I show it to someone :)

Film isn't only an expensive filter. It's also a very cheap (35 cents for a FULL-FRAME omg!) disposable camera sensor that later transforms into a physical "raw file". The built-in creative filter is free. You can swap these "sensors" by trying different film stocks. Cool thing is that you can have true monochrome "sensors", not debayered witchery. Bad thing is you can't produce color "raw files" at home. At least I can't, I'm afraid of all that poisonous chemistry. BW - easy and safe with caffenol. Another cool thing is you can get a larger "sensor" like medium format or very large "sensor" (sheet film) and even build your own camera from scratch if you're into DIY, no electronics required. Images aren't so special, but experience is very special. +Printing from film is another dimension full of experiences.

@jessesenko

15 сағат бұрын

I WOULD love to try this “very large sensor” you speak of and would probably DIY it with the kids. And the cheap monochrome “sensor” is my fav. Thanks for watching!

It wasn't until I saw your website that I realized I'm in your old studio at TCF. Steve from OHM suggested checking you out but you came up organically.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Amazing. Small world! I can smell the building just thinking about it. Say hi to Steve for me!

A fart, I mean art lens, a high mp digital camera, over/under saturating, blurring a background with digital gear doesn't make something special. Note, the folks that talk about their gear, wringing their hands till they get the latest and greatest never show their photos. Ansel nailed it, the most important part of a camera is the 12" behind it. Also, there is nothing worse that a sharp image of a fuzzy (or no) idea. No matter what piece of new gear, if someone hasn't put in the time and effort to improve or master the craft, they will just take the same crap with digital just sharper , or grainy crap with film. I shoot film 80% of the time and my 45 mp d850 does lots of film scanning. Neither means of recording light is "superior," but each produces a particular look that someone may personally prefer. Unfortunately, the hipsters have jumped on film expecting, like that lens or digital body with some crazy new feature will transform their work, they thought film would do the same. It doesn't and since they have the attention span of a piss ant, move on to the next cool thing in no time. That's sped up because film takes some knowledge and effort, failures coat money and plunking down a credit card doesn't suddenly having them kicking out "art."

@jessesenko

20 сағат бұрын

lol, well said. I just want to push people (including myself!) to not get religious about it and to look down and make something special!

That whole speech let me down.

I thought I was the only one who used the floppy disk digital camera. Man that thing was slow but I loved it so much.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

lol. It was so fun. I remember we would hold the frame for 10 secs while it was writing the image to disk because we were worried it was still capturing.

@mgman6000

2 күн бұрын

I bought one and I think it was close to $500 I finally dropped it and broke it 😢

Cameras are tools, the difference lies in how we use them. If this was a competition, i would argue that film is a superior medium in almost every way. Digital photography made things much more convenient, but i wouldn't say that is necessarily better. Digital cameras, mobile phones, AI image generation... made photography so accesible and easy that the value of each picture has gone down and down. Shooting film is a way to return some value and some care (and some thinking) to the pictures you take. You need to justify the money you spent on that film, you'll be more careful in every aspect of the image taking, you'll learn faster so you don't waste that precious film. You will take less pictures, you'll keep your images as negatives for ages, and you won't loose them because one of your hard drives just broke. You don't have to edit your photos so much because they already look gorgeous... and i could keep going, and going much deeper, and i could talk about how technology (and tech companies) are ruining our world and making us dumber every day, but i guess that's a topic for another day xD

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

lol. I agree generally! However I argue it’s more important to make your work even more meaningful and personal regardless of medium. The AIs of today are not much different than the advertising work around us. Always a step behind what’s meaningful or risking saying something. Thanks for a really thoughtful comment Aaron.

If I were to buy a photographic print to frame and hang on my wall I would not be willing to pay very much for a digital inkjet computerized print that AI may of had something to do with. However, a darkroom made hand crafted one of a kind print is worth far more than some cookie cutter push button automatic inkjet picture. In other words… A poster of the Mona Lisa just ain’t worth what the painting is worth.

film is still more fun, digital has unlimited shots, sure it makes you want to retake and make the perfect shot, with film you really have to think about it

THATSA HOT TAKE ON THE STRAP - Don't know how many lenses I'd have smashed by now if the camera weren't chained to me. Really great video and overall totally understand the romanticism of film, but I'm digital all day all the way baby. Henri Cartier said "Your first 10,000 photos are your worst"... thats 277 rolls and $20,000 of portra 400.... don't check my math.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

lol. Strap take is my pro cameras. No strap has ever been on my R5, some of my old film ones have one if I’m wandering, but that’s it. I’m so happy I had my digital camera to burn though a pile of bad photos!

Why do your videos always just slap. If vegas odds had a bet for over under 100k subs in 2 years, I'd take the over.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

lol. Thanks Joseph! My secret is a month of self doubt and loathing!

The better comparison is 35mm tri-x and digital. True the content and composition are the pre-eminent aspects of photography, there is a look that defines the viewing experience which is based on artifacts as desirable, or lack of . So in BW film there is a grain structure that some find very desirable (that grain is evidence of the underlying technology and has also the result of obfuscating detail). If you shoot in BW you've omitted some information that existed in the scene. If you have a visible grain structure you have lessened detail.With less detail you get a conceptual lift from the image as only the minimal aspects of detail are present. So from one perspective the viewing of the image intent, depending on what expectations are given, is enhanced by a defocusing of the mind and making easy for the image meaning to be seen without less important aspects.Sorry for the rambling zen narrative but this subject is an unexplored aspect of photography that I've not seen addressed anywhere.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Thanks Mark, and I talk about this more in my film (like, directiing, not photography) practice... how sharpness is not necessarily the virtue youtube filmmakers would say it is...softening the image so the idea comes through vs the literalness of the scene is important. On the same page as you... and also just spent a small fortune on Tri-x last week 😬

Thank you very much. Agree with you at 95%, but. I think some some technical convenience/advantages/possibilities is play some role, especially in some "challenging" environments. And ultra fast AF and limitless card is needed when you should definitely have this image, without any excuse. So, from this perspective, maybe brand/model/technical features have some right to be discussed. But I am totally agree, that photo are made by photographer, not by self-desiding-what-to-do-AI-assistant. I just bought a film camera, again, after 20 years, and I hope, now I understand why )))) Be happy! Very interesting videos! Have a nice life journey!

@jessesenko

20 сағат бұрын

100% with you. And those technical choices will be made because you know what you're doing, have built a process, and know what you have to achieve.

I only shoot film and have for 40 years, I flirted with digital for about 50 images in the late 2000's, but stopped because I realised I didn't enjoy the new process. This may because I only shoot black and white images on film and the digital ones were all colour. Of the ones I took the ones I like were pretty much monochrome, being late evening images of distance storms off the coast in Orkney . That camera was dirt cheap so stopping using it was no problem. For many years I used cheaper film stocks. I say this, but there was a far greater range of films under the heading 'cheap' that are vastly higher quality than todays cheap films. Now I use Kodak expensive stocks, but sparingly, if possible I'll use Ilford HP5+ or one of the Ilford Delta stocks first. I won't be going back to digital, not because I refuse to admit it's the future, but I prefer both the resolution available through larger formats and the process. My Shen Hao 6x17 is simply too much fun to give up using, as is my Hasselblad.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Wow! Just googled that 6x17 camera… does that mean you get 4 shots per roll? I’m also curious what your fav colour stocks are. Thanks for your comment, Carey!

@careypridgeon

Күн бұрын

@@jessesenko I don't really have favourites myself as I barely use them, I've shot two rolls, and those in the last three years. I buy Portra, but it's my wife who uses it, mostly 160, but we have loads of 160 and 800. I fail to see the point of buying 400 speed when 160 is so versatile. The Shen Hao is a coach built work of art that was made when I ordered it through an importer, I absolutely love it. four shots, but it's worth it if you take your time on each shot. An expensive camera to be sure, but less so than many mirrorless cameras. I do need to buy a new lens for it. I have a 75mm, which is far too wide, so I'll be swapping that for a Rodenstock 115 soon to go with my 135mm and 150mm. Possibly I don't need the 135mm either, I'll have to see.

Someone asked a supermarket team "who is the most important person in this building"? Following a period of silence where no-one dared offer the wrong answer, the lowliest shelf-stacker hesitantly put up his hand and mumbled "the customer"? So caught up with procedures, hierarchy, marketing, advertising and so on, that everyone forgot the target audience. The customer. The same applies to photography - how the image is created makes little difference if nobody appreciates it. Many of HCB's early 20th century images were just 'grab-shots', but are now classed as decisive moment works of art. Our modern techno-wizardry gives us the ability to change our photographs with all manner of computer software. But if the subject matter is poor, the image will still be shit.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Thanks Paul, and I haven't studied Bresson too much, but i'd counter argue that maybe he wasn't worried about a customer? I've worked in marketing in some form for a long time now, and too much customer research seems to sap the life out of work. That being said, i agree it's viewer who decides what work is "great" or lasting, although i'm still pretty jazzed even if i'm the only one who loves a certain shot! Maybe my shots are the shots only a mother could love... :)

Look at that shoe cam shot 👀 👞📷

I'm still using my decade old Samsung NX1. It's the only system I have every lens from, and I can't think of any good reason to "upgrade."

@jessesenko

20 сағат бұрын

I seriously didn't know Samsung made cameras! I know pro photographers who still shoot on "terrible" 10 year old digital cameras because they know the tool so well.

Well done. Even though I am not sure why I needed to watch a twelve minute video to understand that the photographer makes the shot. Nevertheless it WAS good to hear someone calm and collected talking about what should be common knowledge. (....and now for the Ford vs Chevy comparison please... ;-) )

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Like, spit it out, Jesse. Am I right? :) Thanks for watching.

Preach Jesse. So many young "chemical photographers" out there think they're creative, or special, cuz they use film. Old guys know better. I shot medium format film commercially for 20 years. Didn't have a choice. That's what we had. Funny, I never hear anyone calling out film for the tremendous environmental impact it has. From its manufacturing, transportation, distribution, shipping, and not to mention development, #carbonfootprint. Let's stop pretending film is cool. It's not. BTW: Can't wait to see "Twisters" shot on Kodak film! 🙂

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Thank you sir! And this is all very true! And as for Roger Deakins, who famously abandoned film, I just rewatched No Country for Old Men with the kids and the film was so noticeably beautiful, lol. Enjoy the movie!

@jklphoto

19 сағат бұрын

@@jessesenko "Old Country" is an incredible film. We were lucky enough to see Tarrantino's "The Hateful Eight" in one of only a handful of theaters projecting it on 70mm film! Absolutely incredible. He really committed to film. They had to rebuild projection equipment and scour the country to find technicians to even run the equipment. It was a huge undertaking.

For negative lab pro, you don't need to white balance the picture prior to converting the negative. NLP will do that for you. I think it was a grainydays video where Jason told everyone to do that, and the creator of NLP commented and said it wasn't required. I struggle to understand the point of this video because it seems like a multifaceted critique of the culture around photography, and it also simultaneously calls out amateurs and professionals alike. It argues against film, but then shows that the film picture is better. It argues that the medium is not what makes the picture but instead singularly the photographer's skill, but this is not true. The photographer chooses the medium for the photo at hand. Large format sheet film has fundamentally different bokeh characteristics than full frame/35mm cameras. If subject separation is something needed, large format is the way to go in this case. The real point I am trying to make is that a photographer must be deliberate in their usage of a format/medium to create extraordinary images. I guess that the disparity in your point is that composition, leading lines, framing, exposure, and subjects are all related to the actual taking of the image, which is what you talk about (taking images), but the medium and the format is the part of what enables you to capture images the way you see it in your mind. kzread.info/dash/bejne/lnWOpa-qmq7Mo6w.html at time 28:45 there is a picture of a chair. This picture is not possible to be taken on a non-large format camera due to the interactions of the lens size/focal length/bokeh/tilt-shift if applicable/film sharpness from the size of the film. This is apart of the discussion of properly choosing a medium to take the photo at hand. Reasons film makes an image special: * Film has different highlight rolloff / handles high and low exposures differently than a digital image. Occasionally a picture will required overexposing your highlights, and film can handle that without losing all highlight detail whereas digital can't. * People are usually more impressed by in-camera picture taking. * It's fun to see your pictures weeks after you shot them - fun suspense in waiting. * Analog grain is more visually appealing than digital grain * Because you can achieve the medium format bokeh characteristics without breaking the bank. * Because you can shoot large format literally at all. LF doesn't really exist unless you are talking about cinema cameras, and even then, I don't think it compares to sheet film. Apples to oranges a little bit there. * It produces an 'original' via the film negative. Film negatives probably will outlast anything digital since it's a real object anyway. My kids will inherit my photos like I inherited my father's. * Black and white films share a lot of characteristics with B&W only cameras like the M11 Monochrom, but I also don't have to spend $10,000 to do it. * Film forces you as a photographer to slow down to take a better shot both since it costs you money and you don't have that many shots on a roll. This is something that you yourself noticed since digital just let you get away with taking a picture with worse settings. (somewhat similar to what you said) * It is a very tactile process Reasons film makes an image special in a generally unliked way: * Film exposure characteristics are absolutely not usable in every situation. Low light is bad, high contrast is bad. * Underexposed elements get a pretty awful green cast. It's iconic and culturally significant (Cyberpunk 2077 green cast is the same hue for example), but it looks terrible. * $$$$$ Reasons film makes an image not special according to the video: * Film is a format like anything else. If you take bad pictures your pictures are going to be bad (which this is the point that this video makes). Imagine painting and someone coming along and saying, "Using oil paints doesn't make your painting special." It is so inanely topical that it's almost confusing on what they would really mean by that. Of course it doesn't make it special, was anyone confused about that? It's not about the paint, it's about the characteristics and so on. Here is my final statement. If anyone out there really thinks that their picture is special solely because it's on film, they are not photographers enough that I will care about their work or opinion. Art is made through deliberate choice, even if that choice is to be not deliberate in their actions. I spent 1 hour writing this comment out.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Appreciate the time you took for this. Thanks for the NLP tip. I'll keep that in mind. I think, fundamentally, a lot of people argue about gear on this site, and I find that a bit of a distraction. Gear & medium choices or experimentation should be driven by your practice... I'm glad the topic is not lost on you, however I'm surrounded by many people who call themselves photographers but don't even know what a portfolio is, what "editing" really means, and I like to nudge people like them a bit.

Well, the girls would turn the color of an Avocado, when he would drive down their street in his El Dorado He could walk down your street and girls could not resist to stare Pablo Picasso never got called an a.......

Ein gutes Foto,ist ein gutes Foto. Ein gutes Foto auf Film,ist etwas besonderes.(organic) Ein gutes Foto (digital),ist einfach ein gutes Foto. 🤷🏻‍♂️✌🏻

all this technology and the film is still a bit better to my eyes on this shot - particularly for the better trees. Good comparison though

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

lol. Agree!

I have no dog in this fight however… the film photo is better. Ps I will fight you on this 😜

I honestly think this is not film vs digital, but square vs rectangle. 😅

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

lol. I’m team rectangle!

if anyone wants a clean image, get digital. if anyone wants a film look, get film. there's nothing really like a film look or filmic that shooting on actual film. it may not be as great as digital have come these days, but you're not shooting film for it. we shoot because we want it to stay and the process of it is just... therapeutic.

It's the same sh*t with these "decelerate" cameras. They dont make photos special, too. If you cant work focused and get a good composition, every Leica - even with film - wont make your photos any better.

Why are we always looking for "better" and not "different"?

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

But I think different is better!

@chickenitsa

Күн бұрын

@@jessesenko Yes, sometimes. But then, if it were true 100% of the time, it would moot-out the point of your comparison, I guess ... no?

I guess this means I'll have to throw away the $1.99 green strap that I bought at the Army Surplus Store? I was sorta liking it. It allowed me to loop my 5D Mark III around my neck while lugging a 35lb back pack into the Sierras. Maybe they'll give me a refund.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

I’d burn it just to be sure :). Actually, I’ve got a strap on some of my old film cams for wandering. No strap for working.

I just don’t understand the fascination with colour negative film. Transparency I get, black and white yup. C41? Not all film processes are equal

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

I love transparency. I have a few rolls I shot with a 6x7 camera that are just beautiful to backlight and look at, however I find they just don’t have the range that c41 film has. I haven’t shot a ton of it though! Thanks for watching!

@WeekdayProductions

Күн бұрын

@@jessesenko true, but the lack of latitude is what gives control. 6x7 transparencies must be exquisite. I worked in a commercial photographer and we used 5x4 transparencies (as well as a lot of Polaroids!), it was a nice way of working but very different to my other job where my boss shot a lot of C41, where digital has opened up the process. And in fairness, organic hacking is one thing that film offers, burying film, light flares, expired film…..

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Yes. So many variables to play with and I feel you could build your “process” whiting that one universe of film hacking. 5x4 (inches, right?) transparencies must be gorgeous and just glow. I’d be attracted to them like a moth.

This video let me down. I don't own a film camera.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

You have the nerve to say that while you’re IN the video, Glenn???

I'll take that ultra warm film scan any day tbh

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

lol. Kinda loving it now too

Film shot does look a lot better. All that changed is probably your taste got significantly more refined. Like legit the film shot looks miles better

@scotey

2 күн бұрын

Agreed. It's no contest. The digital feels like a random shot you might see anywhere. The film shot has an ineffable quality that pulls you into its universe.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Lol. agree... a part of it is now i actually have a workflow to make it sing! At the time the pragmatic professional choice was to just go all-in on digital for more then a decade 😬

Love the vid ...but the film shot wins by miles and miles.

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

Lol. Kinda agree. Gonna spend some more time with it.

Your starting postulate is false though ;0 I don't think film is better, but definitely brings something special (in addition to all the other things that make photos special)...But all in all, I think I shoot film cause of the difference in the shooting experience. I work with digital 50 hours a week, I need that separation to make "content" with my personnal life.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

100% agree. It’s why I’ve brought all my film stuff back out in the past 5 years. Such a nice break. Thanks for watching!

I am convinced that the primary reason for the resurgence of film is nothing more than status signaling wrapped up in fake authenticity. Film (or "analog" as the signalers like to call it) makes a photograph no more special than pouring mediocre wine into an expensive bottle with a fancy label. Research has shown over and over and over again that all of the perceived higher quality in things like film photographs, or expensive wines, or vinyl records is all entirely imaginary. It is people working hard to convince themselves and to convince others that the amount of money they are spending for this other thing is justified. Because they know there is a large subset of the population who will be impressed by them having spent all that extra money. I am not here to say that people cannot enjoy their "analog" cameras or their plastic based audio playback method, or their fermented grapes. I'm just saying that I don't believe any of their bullshit about it being better. They can enjoy it all they want, I am simply not impressed.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

I try not to yuck peoples' yum too much, but i feel this is part of a bigger general issue people have with living their lives trying to be cool and worried about what others think vs making choices that actually bring them joy. Film brings me joy, but I'm very aware of it's limited effect on my work. Over the years people have asked if i strictly shoot film when my portfolio is probably 100% digital, lol. If a person's ultimate joy is laying on the floor with their favourite album playing on vinyl, that's amazing, but i'm sure they occasionally get distracted and annoyed that they have to flip the album like i do.

@scotey

2 күн бұрын

Where is this research? Even when I don't know the medium in advance, I can "feel" film before I'm consciously aware that I'm feeling it. Particularly with moving images. Granted, this is is a subjective conversation, and to Jesse's point, a great eye is the most powerful medium. But all else equal, film will always supply an extra dimension that I vastly prefer. I believe a great film shot (or footage) changes the perception of time in a really interesting way.

@masanthar

Күн бұрын

I think many people who go back to film these days, do so to slow down and get more in the process of photographing from settings to framing. Besides living in an increasingly digital world makes "analog" more tactile processes and experiences a getaway of sorts. If you want to show off getting around with 10K worth of gear on your neck is more bang for your buck I think.

The music is way too loud❤.

@jessesenko

9 сағат бұрын

I can’t win! I thought I nailed this one but always get a comment :). Music is always too loud in my headphones and too quiet on my speakers. It’s tough! What are you listening on?

@dirkpehrke9909

4 сағат бұрын

@@jessesenko Focal nearfield monitors

I think you're getting sucked into the terminally online analog bro hype community. FIlm has areas where it exceeds, but nobody in the real world is telling pros to shoot film instead of digital. Film is an option, that exists among many other options. There probably are communities dedicated to preaching the wonders of anamorphic lenses, large format film, infrared photos, etc etc. They are all different in their own ways. All that matters is interesting ideas and technique to produce a cool picture. Personally, I shoot both digital and film. I like film because of its variability and limitations which forces me to think a little bit more. Kind of like using a prime lens compared to a zoom. Also both of your images are fine. But think the reason you were drawn to the digital one was the framing more than anything else. My 2¢

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

I’m not worried about getting sucked in. Your pro comment is bang on. The irony is from a couple years after I took that pic to 2015 I was 100% a professional photographer, and 100% digital. Clients didn’t want film, they wanted digital capture with a big screen they could point at their products on while on set.

Film is more tactile, and I have no choices to make after the film is loaded aside from composition. I like how old cameras feel and sound. I like the delay in getting negatives backs which is why I, sometimes, use film. Can get the same shot with any camera. It just comes down to how I feel when I wake up. Oh, not that it matters but I prefer the film shot. Not because it’s in film, just because I do.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

Yep. I think we’re on the same page. It’s not inherently special. Just the process it’s a part of.

The whole point of film is lost the moment you digitize it. You must develop the film by hand and then use a darkroom to print by hand. This method will produce an image that is unique and one of a kind. A well stored negative and print will last at least a hundred years. It can’t be copied or stolen over the internet and that in its self gives your work higher value. Electric push button photography is just you taking credit for what is now just a point and shoot process that the photographer has very little to do with the outcome because todays digital cameras do everything but depress the shutter button.😅

No real need to make a video about the obvious ;-)

@jessesenko

20 сағат бұрын

Will delete ASAP and self-flagellate for remainder of day!

ain't watching the video because yes it does

so you are telling us that you JUST figured out what most of us have known right from the beginning - that the photographers vision is the most important thing ! Now if you are saying that film and digital are both interchangeable you could not be more wrong - they defiantly have a different look one of which you might prefer over the other

@jessesenko

Күн бұрын

No, I figured it out in 2008

Digital is as tasty as a burger at macdonalds. You are free. But I prefer a good burger in Vega TX.

@jessesenko

2 күн бұрын

I'm assuming digital cameras are outlawed there.

@cbob213

2 күн бұрын

lol. Is a good burger not tasty? Or a tasty burger not as good as a “good burger”

@chriscard6544

2 күн бұрын

@@jessesenko ahaha

@GrantSR

2 күн бұрын

I think we found the status signaler. There are lots of people in Texas who effing love Whataburger. Are you going to tell me that that is the superior burger? The best burger I have ever had was at The Surly Wench, on 4th avenue, in Tucson Arizona. It barely cost a couple dollars more than a McDonald's burger. Every really expensive burger that I have tried was awful. And also a gigantic pain in the ass to eat because they're 14" tall. Just because YOU perceive a burger to be better, doesn't mean it actually IS better. It just means that YOU like it better. There is no such thing as the best hamburger. There is the hamburger that you like. However, when the thing that you like almost always turns out to be the thing that's most expensive, you might want to stop and take a look at why you keep thinking those most expensive things are always better. Who is making your decisions for you as to what is better. You, or the person who put the price tag on the thing?

@chriscard6544

2 күн бұрын

@@GrantSR I havent said better, I only said I prefer. Try the saloon at Vega (TX), really it is awesome. I prefer film because it is more tasty. You are free. But you should think what society you want. I prefer amish society than those crazy new yorkers that kill the planet. It's a choice.

It does if you fucking print it in a darkroom with f-stop printing split grade printing instead of turning it into a digital file that's not actually a photo you should read Nicholas Mirzoeff how to see the world 😂😂😂 level up my boy o yeah that's what separates film from digital and it will also separate it from AI real photography the fundamentals not 0 - 1 and computation 1 love

@ledheavy26

2 күн бұрын

Digital photography is real photography, get out of here with that nonsense. I've spent plenty enough time making both analog prints and digital, the people that really try to put down one or the other is so stupid and about as mind numbing as reading you run on sentence of a paragraph.

You scanned the film image, so they are both digital. Your title is misleading.

Why is your film scan so dark? Its not been captured properly? Also you edited the film scan yet didnt re edit the digital raw file? You said yourself you dont like the bluish greens? So change it? Lol Hardly set in stone lol This vid really is a waste of time because you didnt simply edit the raw file version as well. Plus you cant compare 120 film scan with a very old 10mpx cropped sensor file lol

Photography begins at daguerreotype and ends with modern silver-based films. Digital...is the work of the devil.

@jessesenko

20 сағат бұрын

Guess i know where i'm going then! :)

@jenspi4725

19 сағат бұрын

@@jessesenko It's ok...I'll have a beer with you when we get there. I bought the X2D and a few lenses from Capture Integration...May Ansel and Edward forgive me...

The whole point of film is lost the moment you digitize it. You must develop the film by hand and then use a darkroom to print by hand. This method will produce an image that is unique and one of a kind. A well stored negative and print will last at least a hundred years. It can’t be copied or stolen over the internet and that in its self gives your work higher value. Electric push button photography is just you taking credit for what is now just a point and shoot process that the photographer has very little to do with the outcome because todays digital cameras do everything but depress the shutter button.😅