On film...
I am very passionate about 'traditional' methods of photography. I use 35mm film.
I once read something which summed up my sentiments,
"With digital capture, you've simply translated the moment into numbers, and then wiped the device clean for the next image. With film, the negative is an actual physical trace of the moment "
This hit the nail on the head.
Further, I somehow prefer the idea of image-capture being 'chemistry', rather than electronics. It's the process that Fox Talbot discovered when capturing that image of the lead-glass window, that set into motion an entire industry which continues to this day. I am conscious of connecting with this history when using film.
This is not to denigrate digital photography at all - in the end even the film has to be scanned into a digital environment, & then printed there too. I won't pontificate about which method is more 'real' - as even using film is to render an interpretation of reality. I use Fuji film-stock not only because of it's sharpness and ability to produce exhibition-quality prints - but also because of the particular rapport it has with landscape imagery.
