In general, there’re two approaches available for the street photographer who uses both digital and film cameras.
With a digital camera, you could take multiple shots of the same scene.
You could take a shot that you think might not work but do it just to see what happens.
In other words, you could AFFORD to experiment with a digital camera.
With a film camera, you’d tend to be more circumspect.
This means that film photography reveals your competency.
After all, even if you could afford it, a wasted shot is wasted film.
Thanks for reading.
Camera: Olympus XA2
Film: Ilford XP2 400
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Published by eddietay
I am a poet and an educator. I have come to realise in recent years that the act of writing poetry has trained my mind to be always on the prowl for everyday moments that might be suitable material for my writing.
Hence, I turn to photography in order to record some of these moments. I soon discover that the photographs I am taking, using film rangefinder cameras which are more discreet and hence suitable to the task at hand, are in the tradition of street photography.
In search of poetry, I have become a street photographer.
What can Hong Kong teach me about street photography, and what can street photography teach me about Hong Kong?
This blog seeks to address that question.
View all posts by eddietay
Hong Kong Lucida 
I loved seeing you in a new city through your lens.
Many thanks! Cities are wonderful places for street photography.
However, is there a ‘wasted shot’?
Good point 🙂 not if you learn from it, I suppose
Well I should have elaborate. I mean if its completely blurry and not visible, that would be wasted. However as long as something came out and I supposed recognizable , it might look boring or dismal in someway, it’s still ‘time captured and recorded’ therefore not wasted.
And another thing, using many film cameras, particularly rangefinders, is very hard work after using a digital auto everything camera. Slow photography I call it.