Shooting 35mm film is hard, but I still choose it.

28mmStreet
22 hours ago
3 min read

May 2026 - Blog# 27

For years, street photography for me was entirely digital.

Digital cameras taught me speed, consistency, and flexibility. I got used to instant feedback, endless frames, and a workflow that felt almost frictionless.

But over time, I slowly moved closer to analog photography until I eventually sold all my digital cameras completely.

Now in 2026, I shoot exclusively 35mm film street photography. I use a Leica M6 reissue with mostly a Leica 28mm Summicron, hand-roll all my black and white film, and develop and scan everything at home myself.

At this point, analog isn’t an experiment anymore — it’s simply how I work.

And I genuinely enjoy it.

But even now, there are small, recurring frustrations that never fully go away.

Strange relationship with uncertainty

Film also comes with a level of uncertainty that digital completely removes.

You don’t know if exposure was right.
You don’t know if focus was slightly off.
You don’t know if motion worked in your favor or against you.

You only find out later.

Sometimes that uncertainty is what makes film exciting. It forces trust in instinct instead of constant correction.

But it also means there are entire days where you come home with no real idea of what you actually captured.

That uncertainty never fully disappears — you just learn to live with it.

When film loading breaks the rhythm

One of the most persistent frustrations is still loading film into my Leica M6.

Every few rolls, something goes "wrong". The film doesn’t catch properly, or it doesn’t advance as it should. I always make sure to check as I've missed shots because I though it was advancing properly.

That moment always breaks the flow completely. Street photography depends on rhythm — walking, observing, reacting.

And nothing interrupts that faster than having to stop on a street corner, open the camera, and figure out what went wrong or standing there fiddling with the film while the moment passes.

It’s a small thing technically, but creatively it’s disruptive.

Low ISO and overcast weather

One of the more practical struggles is shooting low ISO film in Scandinavian light.

Many days are overcast, flat, and low contrast. Especially in winter, strong light can feel rare.

But I still often prefer slower black and white film stocks.

That creates constant compromise:

slower shutter speeds
wider apertures than I prefer
less flexibility in fast-changing street scenes

Sometimes it works perfectly. Other times it feels like I’m negotiating with the environment instead of reacting freely.

Digital made this effortless. Film forces adaptation.

I had to use a lab..and why I stopped

After selling my digital cameras, I had to rely on a lab for scanning my negatives.

At first, it felt efficient. I could drop off rolls and get scans back quickly without spending hours at home scanning.

But over time, the results became frustrating.

The scans were expensive, yet often looked flat, milky, or overly bright. Many felt disconnected from how I experienced the scenes.

Contrast felt inconsistent, tones felt pushed, and everything had a similar over-processed softness.

When I asked about it, the explanation was simple: it was a “flat profile.”

Technically fine — but creatively, it didn’t feel like my work anymore.

What I realized during that period was simple: I missed control over how my photographs were interpreted.

Getting scans back quickly was convenient, but it removed me from the final stage of the process.

Even though it’s time-consuming, I prefer scanning myself over outsourcing the final interpretation of my photographs. It keeps the entire workflow in my hands.

That’s why I eventually took back control of scanning my photographs. A digital camera is still a necessity for me in that regard.

For years, street photography for me was entirely digital.

Digital cameras taught me speed, consistency, and flexibility. I got used to instant feedback, endless frames, and a workflow that felt almost frictionless.

But over time, I slowly moved closer to analog photography until I eventually sold all my digital cameras completely.

Now in 2026, I shoot exclusively 35mm film street photography. I use a Leica M6 reissue with mostly a Leica 28mm Summicron, hand-roll all my black and white film, and develop and scan everything at home myself.

At this point, analog isn’t an experiment anymore — it’s simply how I work.

And I genuinely enjoy it.

But even now, there are small, recurring frustrations that never fully go away.

Strange relationship with uncertainty

Film also comes with a level of uncertainty that digital completely removes.

You don’t know if exposure was right.

You don’t know if focus was slightly off.

You don’t know if motion worked in your favor or against you.

You only find out later.

Sometimes that uncertainty is what makes film exciting. It forces trust in instinct instead of constant correction.

But it also means there are entire days where you come home with no real idea of what you actually captured.

That uncertainty never fully disappears — you just learn to live with it.

When film loading breaks the rhythm

One of the most persistent frustrations is still loading film into my Leica M6.

Every few rolls, something goes "wrong". The film doesn’t catch properly, or it doesn’t advance as it should. I always make sure to check as I've missed shots because I though it was advancing properly.

That moment always breaks the flow completely. Street photography depends on rhythm — walking, observing, reacting.

And nothing interrupts that faster than having to stop on a street corner, open the camera, and figure out what went wrong or standing there fiddling with the film while the moment passes.

It’s a small thing technically, but creatively it’s disruptive.

Low ISO and overcast weather

One of the more practical struggles is shooting low ISO film in Scandinavian light.

Many days are overcast, flat, and low contrast. Especially in winter, strong light can feel rare.

But I still often prefer slower black and white film stocks.

That creates constant compromise:

slower shutter speeds

wider apertures than I prefer

less flexibility in fast-changing street scenes

Sometimes it works perfectly. Other times it feels like I’m negotiating with the environment instead of reacting freely.

I had to use a lab..and why I stopped

I will never get used to travel with film

Traveling with film introduces another layer of unpredictability.

Some airports are completely fine with hand-checking film. Others refuse outright and insist everything goes through scanners.

Most of the time, nothing obvious happens. But the uncertainty stays with you afterward.

Even small potential exposure changes create doubt later when you finally develop the roll.

Unlike digital, you can’t check or verify anything in the moment.

You just have to trust that it was fine.

Why I still chose film despite all of this

All of these frustrations exist at the same time as something else:

I still prefer shooting film.

Not because it’s easier — it clearly isn’t — but because the entire process feels more intentional.

The friction never really disappears:loading issues, uncertainty, travel stress, light limitations, and time-consuming development.

But over time, that friction stopped feeling like something to avoid. Eventually I've come to accept it.

Film photography constantly asks for more patience, more attention, and more trust in your own decisions.

And despite everything, that’s still the way I prefer to work.

Comments