Do amateur photographers still use film cameras?

[sandyRoe]

I'd guess digital has made film redundant

[Bbbananas]

My BF does. A fancy Olympus thing. Although he probably wouldn't refer to himself as an amateur - he fancies himself as a bit of a David Bailey.....

[sandyRoe]

http://www.google.co....tftTcyHC8Oq8AOxwdiaCQ
He's starting to look his age

[vulcan]

This says they do
http://www.photograph...phers_still_use_film/

[vulcan]

Sorry sandyRoe, my link was for professionals.

[Bbbananas]

Was very sexy in his prime time though sandy!

[funnygirl]

I much prefer film cameras.

[jamesnan]

My husband still prefers his film cameras, using slide film, to his digital ones, both for the photos they take and for the fact that he can see and use the slides . Digital have their time and place but definitely come 2nd for him.

[Slapshot]

I still chuck the odd roll in a film camera, not very often mind but if someone wants that sort of thing I'm happy to oblige, especially Black and White. Prefer digital now though because I'm getting better results with photoshop, you take years learning skills in developing and manipulating images on film, then bang they change it all to digital!!

Biggest problem now is if the film camera breaks down there are very few places can repair it.

[cazzz1975]

I use a digital SLR which is like the best of both worlds :)

[237SJ]

I think there is much more skill in film photography. Anyone can take a good photo now. You can`t beat the result from something like Fuji Velvia. The results (when done well) have a depth that digital doesn`t. You can see that clearly when you go to something like the Wildlife Photographer of the year exhibition. There is much more skill involved in the dark room than there is at the keys of a computer too.

[Slapshot]

@Cazzz I use digital SLR's as well but still enjoy the clunky feel of my old Canon EOS 1 with a roll of Illford FP4 or HP5, few hours shooting then into the darkroom...great fun. Digital is getting closer much closer but the right results take much longer to come by on a PC

[Answerprancer]

Quite a few people still use 'analogue' cameras, professional and amateur.
Ostensibly they give different 'qualities'. Personally I find the comparison similar to the argument over which is best out of CDs and vinyl. You can add weirdy grainyness and B&W to digital pics if you wish to 'downgrade'. Similarly you could add loads of crackly bacony pops and scratches to a CD at the recording stage !
What I'd like to know is this:
How many, from the analogue photography school of advocacy insist on this format for genuine artistic reasons and who are just technophobic luddites.
(I'm not being entirely serious with the above btw).

[Answerprancer]

I disagree 237SJ, Photoshop and Lightroom have become today's 'darkroom' and there is still a lot of artistic skill involved but in a different way. Why fiddle around with loads of toxic chemicals, caustic liquids and lightbulbs when the same effects (and much more) can be produced digitally ?

[jno]

quite so, AP: I never wanted to mess with chemicals, so was resigned to waiting a week to see whether Supasnaps had made a mess of my films. Now I can do it myself at home (including sometimes making a mess of them) and greatly enjoy it.