I was doing a little pixel peeping.  This was not a scientific test.  In fact it sort of happened by accident.  I just happened to be shooting both my film and digital cameras and happened to get a very similar frame.  The differences are subtle but they all add up and the look is quite different.

The film camera was my Contax 645 and the digital was my Canon 5d mk2.  The Contax had an 80mm and the Canon a 50mm.  The difference in the image area (the Contax is much bigger) makes the focal length similar.

Ok, here’s a side by side.  What standouts to me is the skin tones.  I much prefer the warm tones of the film.  The digital looks very magenta.  The digital could be color corrected but I’ve noticed that if you try and warm the skin tones the rest of the image becomes very yellow.  Notice the foliage in the background is already quite yellow.  I also prefer the contrast of the film.  This was shot it not ideal conditions, very bright sun during midday, the digital looks washed out especially in eyes.

Here you can see film’s ability to capture highlights (the very brightest areas).  Look at the differences in her veil.  There is very little detail in the digital where the film has a beautiful glow to it.  Another subtle difference is the “fall off” or transition between light and dark areas.  If you compare her hair in both shots, the digital seems to have a harsh edge.  The film is a much smoother transition into the white of the sky.

The other obvious difference is the grain of film image.  Zoomed in this close it could be viewed as a disadvantage but at more normal viewing distances it adds a organic feel to the image that is very beautiful.  It’s not unlike the impressionist paintings, step back a bit and the patterns and colors blend into something beautiful.

Examining the image extremely close amplifies their differences even more.  I really don’t like the harsh line on the digital image between the veil and the leaves in the background.  Also there is almost no detail in the veil where the film image captures more of the subtleties.

Here’s the two images at their original size.  The difference are much less obvious here but they are still there. One thing I love about this particular film (Kodak Porta 400 220) is how the greens are cooler, almost “minty”, yet the skin tones are still very warm – you just can’t get that with digital. Contrast, skin tones, fall off, grain, all add up and to my eyes film wins… hands down.

Things to consider

Most couples that come to me aren’t photographers. If I talked about grain structure and fall-off I would quickly get glazed over looks and the meeting would be over before we even cracked open an album.  I thought it would be better illustrated as a blog post.  Beyond the visual differences, shooting with film is one of those art forms where the sum is more than it’s total parts. There is something about the process that feels great. Maybe because it’s been around much longer than digital or maybe I’m just helplessly nostalgic. Either way, I love it and hope this ever-shrinking art form never goes away.

-Andy